Step away and step aside, you Marxist historian, your time is over

 

Step away and step aside, you Marxist historian, your time is over

An all-original poem by Sujay Rao Mandavilli

 

You craft began with the work of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the mid-19th century,

To these two souls you owe your existence largely if not greatly,

Though Hegel, Kosambi, and others did contribute,

Along with the efforts of some other followers and champions of the trade who possessed steely resolute,

With class struggle and class conflict as your talking points and pivots,

And materialism and dialectical materialism being your shoots,

In a limited set of issues you engage,

In fossilized and ossified methodologies you partake,

Marxist historiography is obsolete, and its practitioners make an infinite regress,

Marxist historians often do not work holistically in the interests of scientific and intellectual progress,

We must a small digression make and begin this poem by saying that we must not condone,

Leave alone prop up or support,

The perils, follies and excesses of right-wing idiocy,

To any level, standard or degree,

Because the right wing can be noxious,

Insidious,

And positively dangerous to society,

Even as they project their claimed strengths to the laity quite absurdly,

Some say Marxist historiography is teleological and deterministic and posits an origin in history at the start of revolution of the proletariat only,

Though they may be right only partly,

Such paradigms are riddled with contradictions and may even block the reconstruction of economic history or the history of caste partially,

Others say Marxist historiography is one-sided and polarizes thereby never promoting convergence of thoughts to any degree,

It must also be noted that one-sided approaches breed incompetence mostly,

And there is also a natural misalignment between the efforts of Marxist historians and the ever evolving needs of society,

One-sided approaches do not serve the cause of science and promote healthy scholarship ideally,

Using scientific constructs of history,

To drive away superstition and mythology,

Is not even in their DNA or philosophy,

In their work there is little non-bias and scholarly objectivity,

Or transparency, openness, reliabilism, and non-subjectivity,

Most of their oeuvres are heavily blighted by the iron grip of ideology,

And the only form of intense and passionate dedication is dedication to ideology,

Marxist historiography is based on Eurocentric paradigms; and does not take local realities into account completely,

Thereby even promoting racism, bigotry and Eurocentrism indirectly,

Can we therefore even refer to it as the Colonial-Marxist-Imperialist school of historiography provocatively and retrospectively?

Marxist historians may even promotes an ideological discrimination between religions and cultures and one that is not based on a complete and accurate study,

Marxist historiography may even neglect study of cultural and non-material factors that inevitably mold history and shape society,

As some practitioners even tend to brush away culture more or less totally,

Marxist historians do not follow inter-disciplinary approaches even half-heatedly,  

They may well become the weakest link in the social sciences eventually,

They do not also help scholars from allied disciplines to achieve their objectives naturally,

Some Marxist endeavours tend to become less scholarly and more political eventually and subconsciously,

Such endeavours breed limited, one-sided intellectualism and that is most certainly a fallacy,

And in extreme cases even intellectual dishonesty,

They are also infamous for their poor integration between pre-history, proto-history and history,

And inevitably lack interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity,  

Marxist historiography even conflicts with objectivity and rationality and the rigorous quest for the truth and veracity,

It is also sometimes marked by a theoretical underdevelopment and lack of a long term strategy,

There is often no appetite for innovation and research on novel areas like history of science and technology,

This leads to gradual loss of control of mainstream institutions often irrevocably,

Such short-sighted misadventures cannot continue beyond a generation or two at any rate,

As it slowly gets associated with senility and old age,

Even intellectual equivalents of Glasnost and Perestroika cannot save them mightily,

As they are left by the wayside high and dry,

And may be seen by future generations as following weird, illogical approaches quite absurdly,

They also bring science and scientific endeavor a bad name,

In spite of all their trappings of self-proclaimed glory and fame,

Marxist historians lose credibility and no one believes them even when they are right,

The cry wolf syndrome even throws people off guard all right,

You have a limited purview,

As your ideology is current to a limited few,

You have a limited bandwith,

With diversity and a broad spectrum of ideas remaining a myth,

In addition to your non-integration with pre-history and proto-history,

You do not also advocate integration across geographies,

You have a limited spectrum and area of operation too,

As you are driven primarily by ideology to boot,

And always fail to renew yourself anew,

Though your possessed traditions and cherished attributes can be employed by other schools too,

You resultantly deal with a limited set of issues with flawed intellectualism,

Making your technique flawed and incomplete,

Deluded genuinely that your are uncommonly smart,

And proudly cherish and flaunt your trade and your art,

Though you lay the onus on others to compensate,

You need songs and symbols in your name,

For you are all things considered, a true ideology, though one with relative fame,

Depleted intellectual faculties,

Illogical , irrational behavior,

Loss of personal self-respect and dignity,

Wild and untamed intellectual freedom without social responsibility,

You obviously even for the most part do not pursue responsible patriotism as it may be against your ideology,

You allow yourself to be unknowingly fooled and misled by dogmatists subscribing to other rival and ideologies,

Such as conscious, subsconsious or unconscious racism,

Or sinful and black-hearted imperialism,

Your only salvation is death,

Our only liberation is your death,

As your coordinates seldom budge,

Or with new realities adapt and adjust,

As you create and birth counter-reactions galore,

With counter devious and slithering machinations aft and fore,

You cannot even propagate or fight for your own interests, you merry Andrews,

Let alone resuscitate and reinvigorate yourself anew,

Your resultant and concomitant naivety is being exploited by others too,

You self-destroying and self-defeating souls,

Even as you the benefits of your ideology extol,

Even in one of your unauthorized extensions namely Indology,

One that even derisively and contemptuously deserves to be called the “Colonial-imperialist- Marxist” school of Indology,

Oh you expired and defunct Marxist historian,

You may even be labeled for what it is worth, a distortian,

Though you may have allowed other schools to exist,

You may have verily promoted intellectual stagnation and intellectual mediocrity,

As you do not mostly act in the interests of science, the education system or society,

Your results are visible and apparent for the laity to see,

The nine million three hundred and fifty seven thousand five hundred and fifty seventh criticism of Marxist historiography is a follows, we may say and add,

In an extremely crude and exaggerated fashion indeed, 

Though this is an obvious exaggeration,

Remember though that there is a law of unintended consequences proposed by Robert K. Merton,

Which essentially states that even the path to hell may be paved with the best of intentions,

Marxist may proudly refer to their method as the “Marxist method” (with an emphasis on the “a”,) to grab attention,

With a limited set of duties and assignments,

You adhere to and adopt a form of subconscious and unconscious communalism indeed,

Though not as dangerous as that of right-wing fascists so to speak,

Deceit, calumny, suppression won’t work, your fossilized souls,

Stuck in a time warp you demented folk,

Your endeavours have the uncanny knack of producing quite the opposite effect,

As we in our work on the various Marxist Gods that failed, did dissect, 

People may well say then with all the self-reflection that is of any value and worth,

Even make it known and make it heard,

That Marxist historians, their intellectual capabilities crippled, once walked upon this earth,

You are beyond reform, and your salvation indeed lies only in death,

You may claim to fight right-wing fascists truly,

But alas that can never be accomplished by imposing a counter-ideology,

You do not even evaluate religion comprehensively and adequately,

Or fight the menace of religion deep-rootedly and comprehensively,

Only on the basis of the narrow prism that is your ideology,

For you have for a large part no intention to do any good to society,

Only mostly slavish subservience to your ideology,

Neither in the least any contemporary methodology,

Human psychology you do not bother to comprehend or understand,

Even as you disastrously continue to stick your heads in the sand,

And embody brainlessness beyond belief,

Others may not find it impressive as you tragically do not see, 

Abandon your cherished ideology and the favorable results will be there for all to see,

Adopt neutrality and non-ideology as your decree,

The principle of equidistance and absolute neutrality,

And the right wing will decline as it has no reason to cry hoarse indeed,

That is the only way to fight the right as the sane will agree,

As it is often said one kind of bias legitimizes every other kind of bias,

That is the social sciences equivalent of the law of action and reaction in natural science,

Genuineness of purpose alone does not produce right,

The jury is also justly always out, Who is more insane the far left or the far right?

And whose camp the fair name of objective scholarship more grievously blight?

But hold on tight, not all is hunky dory,

The right must not gain ground as the left inevitably fades into oblivion and obscurity.

 

 

 

 

 

Universal thinking and long term vision

 

Universal thinking and long term vision

An all-original poem by Sujay Rao Mandavilli

 

As we in the narrow tides of the present wallow,

In half-baked initiatives shallow and hollow,  

Or endeavours, chained, encumbered and callow,

Whether it is with respect to our own respective half-lived and unfulfilled lives,

Or the world at large that allow various nearsighted acts to flourish and connive,

The dangers of presentism are there for the wise to visually see and feel,

In all its ramifications and incarnations indeed,

Fellow brethren let us relieve ourselves from such agonizing myopism and take leave,

Regardless of race, colour, ethnicity, nationality or creed,

Of all facets of human undertakings that are devoid and bereft of lofty vision,

That work stealthily and willy-nilly to our utter derision,

Visionary skills along with cogitation and deep-rooted thought,

And strategizing must be intrinsic and not an afterthought,

We had even given these a name as an aforethought,

Linkages across time we had christened aeterntism,

Linkages across space we had baptized ominmodism,

Exponential thinking with transformative growth and progress,

Are vitally important and must be followed to the hilt lest we regress,

Trend analysis, along with data study and all other forms of critical analysis,  

The absence of which will lead inevitably to an analysis paralysis,  

Don’t dwell in the present alone,

Understand the past well enough lest you later repent and atone,

Don’t winnow its real or imagined glory,

Or you’ll eventually be remorseful and sorry,  

Understand its long-lived strengths and harsh and bitter lessons to be learnt,

Its weaknesses, Its limitations, Its dilemmas adroitly avert,        

The present is incomplete without a dissection or an anatomy of the past,

You cannot skillfully comprehend the present without dissecting the past,

At bay and distraught,

All your arrogance in this regard shall come to naught,

Anyone who succumbs to presentism must even be labeled an ignoramus, a bigot or an idiot,

This is true of diverse arenas such as engineering, medicine and philosophy,

Or science, esteemed know-how and technology,

Or birth control and necessary population management,

Or environmental movements and human trusteeship of the planet,

Or assessments of the relative speed, power, and efficiency of automobiles even scientifically,

From the dawn of automotive history,

Understand the nuances, intricacies and gradations of progress verily,

Never oversimplify aspects of history,

Even follow passionately the march and heartbeats of history,

Just don’t brood over the past or anaemically dwell in the past,

Even though you must not disrespect the past,

And must respect all its innovators and inventors to a great degree,

For we rest on their laurels truly and effectively,

Learn from past mistakes collectively and individually,

Don’t act just transactionally,

Episodically,

Or anectodically,

Do not think merely in bits or pieces or incoherently,

But judiciously, cogently and harmoniously,

Don’t be dreamy eyed or apprehensive about the future’s presents or gifts,

That will zanily lead to aberrations in thinking and witty and jocular clefts,

Just take it in your stride,  

And smile,

Pull no punches,

Bare no bones,

Yet wisely and effectively link the past with the present,

And carefully and cautiously link the future with the present,

Effortlessly and seamlessly,

Overcome and overlook short term considerations that is the wise man’s decree,

Make short-term considerations subservient to medium and long-term considerations,

As far as possible no short-term gain or short-term pain,

Neither long-term pain nor long-term gain,

Balance the two judiciously,

And harmoniously,

Just as you must make local considerations subservient to global considerations,

The following are veritably the need of the hour, namely institutional coherentism,

Epistemic coherentism and methodological inductivism,

This is lacking sorely and dismally in  quotidian endeavour and behaviourism,

First they say theory A is good, then B, then again, A,

They also sometimes first say heavier cars are safer, Then lighter cars,

Make up your mind before it is too late,

The world is a nested loop, the world is a nested chain,

There is a continuous dialogue between the past, present and the future,

Whether it may even be in the realm of global warming, or environmental degradation,

There is no ready savior,  

No room for quick fixes and no indeed short term fixes,

No space for ham handed approaches and no myopic approaches,

No time for blinkered vision and no knee jerk reactions,

Understand the long-term implications of everything,

Understand the long-standing pain of lesser cultures,

Short-term attention spans are dangerous,

Focus on vision and focus on strategy,

Focus on wisdom and philosophy,

Focus on long-term consistency,

This must be a cultivated art,

Taught in schools and colleges and carefully reinforced also through media and art,

Avoid the kiss of death,

And shrewdly dodge the dance of death,

What works well in the long-run and what is good for the long-term,

Is good for now and for all time,

What works well for all occasions and all locations,

Is as good as gold indeed,

Only those who synthesize the present with the past duly,

Only those who syncretize the present with the past astutely,

Will do no one’s bidding and think wisely,

Adtroitly,

Loftily,

And shall predict and deftly prognoze,

Adroitly and expertly,

Also alertly,

Throw hard and throw your weapons far and long,

And aim fast,

Only those who syncretize the present and future with the past,

Shall contribute to humanity’s progress,

And shall add to the march of civilization and science,

That is the stone cold and the barebones truth,

Those who do not understand time’s linkages act, think and feel myopically,

Those who do not fathom time’s myriad and multiple associations act, think and feel shortsightedly,

And will inevitably be foolish and raving foolhardy,

Those who do not comprehend time’s interrelationships act, think and feel incompletely,

Their actions would only lead catastrophically to a hail Mary pass.

The power of independent thinking

 

The power of independent thinking

An all-original poem by Sujay Rao Mandavilli

 

Independent thinking is for all intents and purposes, an incontestable and an interconnected art,

Indeed, it must be emphasized that it is a painstakingly cultivated and a well-rounded art,

A product indeed comprised mostly of toil, sweat, blood and tears,

With creative and intellectual inputs justly utilized,

And innovative skills befittingly enlarged and amplified,

With talent and artistic ability immensely and powerfully magnified,

With a steep and tortuous ascent, and rewards that in the end justify the sedulous efforts,

As opposed to the fruits of a filthy, downtroden and prostrate clart,

Not indeed one that is a mere digressed manifestation of chained and unfounded fears, 

Not just random or vaguely unpointed destiny,

And certainly and not in the least some accidental serendipity,

With a non-subjective and a focused harvest,

That reveals itself prolifically and in graduated measure to the noblest and the ablest,

You artful, accomplished and skillful creator,

You benign, steely and resolute inventor,

Of vigorous intellectual enterprise,  

As from your felicity accrues your eminence grise,

Independent thinking is also a carefully orchestrated skill,

That sets its measured and graduated results aside from tedious chores that are run of the mill,

It is also indeed the ability to apply one’s own self-nourished arts effectively and skillfully,

 

And to coordinate and to liaise the execution of multidimensional tasks dexterously,

 

Independent thinking is also in all ways a true and a meritorious science,

The application of which sets it apart from any dodgy and dubious proto-science,  

It also dons the hat of rigour, precision, testability and empirical objectivity,

And resultantly also wears the cloak of dignified and virtuous respectability,

Independent thinking provides a modicum of stealthy and surreptitious power,

And from the disrespectful chains of slavery added cover,  

It provides a fair quantum of arbitrage and leverage too,

From the swift and speedy trek of progress that the obscure shackles of dogma eschew,

Providing a liberal degree of fulcrum and propulsion,

From the manacles of servitude, independent thinking provides ammunition,

From enslavement, bondage and servitude it imparts a potent weapon,

Indeed independent thinking is the hallmark of true intellectualism,

It is the hallmark of an erudite person, not of blind-eyed confirmism,

The hallmark of a true and bonafide thinker, not a blinkered myopist,

The true sign of a undisputed scholar, not an unthinking dogmatist,

The calling card of a well-rounded person, not an inexpert maladroit,

The hallmark of a self-made man, whose intellectual habits and traditions are clever and adroit,

We know that we don’t know only when we think independently,

As this is a fitting indication of ingenious and inventive originality,

Leaving aside all pretentions and roadblocks in the name of ideology,

Dedication and commitment will also result willy-nilly,

Willingness to do good to science and society to a respectable degree,

Through rigorous self-discipline and not just some random entropy,

Efforts made to kindle and rekindle one’s own curiosity endlessly and cyclically,

You take on risk too though only to a highly reasoned degree,

Non-servitude provides you momentum and pedigree,

Perseverance, steadfastness, and self-effort throw in their lot as well,

Along with fecund creativity and individuality meritorious,

Don’t lose your spark of madness at any count,

Even as you let go of all things fleeting and superfluous,

And demolish all lingering signs of ruinous self-doubt,

Even as you the arcane canons of tedium and monotony flout,

Trust your raw gut, your reflex and your instinctiveness,

As that indeed imparts and bestows loads of inventiveness and distinctiveness,

So get down to brass-tacks and knuckle down,

Cogitate, ruminate and introspect heavily and bear down,

And yours eventually shall be the victorious crown,

Envision big and bright and dynamically ideate,

Novel paradigms and holistic frameworks amalgamate,

As you change the status quo and build the new,

Castigate tradition if necessary and take big steps forward too,  

For the heavy dead hand of tradition is a banality,

It languishes and causes everything to languish in lifeless unoriginality,

Independent thinking is life’s change agent for sure,

Even as we elevated caliber and lofty ideals ensure,

Stooges, lackeys and thumping boys you must certainly not be,

Nor underling, minions or lame puppets be,  

Or regimented and staid like a cat’s paw,

Much like vacuous and disoriented men of straw,

So, pull up your socks,

And think laterally and out of the box,

Discoveries are rarely anticipated,

The direction of progress is chaotic and unexpected,  

But robust interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches will your gantry be,

Independent thinking is the surefire mantra for success veritably,

A necessary adjunct and concomitant for all times to be,

For all that is good, beautiful and free,

The recipe for long-term success and the path to the inalienable cup of victory,  

So, think powerfully and independently,

Though also always tread cautiously,

And do not certainly proceed and stumble ruinously,

Don’t rebel for the sake of it and without a fair cause,

Therefore, rebel warily and only with just and apposite cause,

Don’t discard, jettison or castigate everything summarily,

Don’t compare anything unfairly,

Because apples will always be apples and oranges will always oranges be,

Along with innovation and creativity self-discipline and self-regulation are also always necessary,

Go far enough, because that is where you’ll find the truth and all that is beautiful to behold and see,

But be warned and do not let yourself go recklessly and aimlessly adrift or get lost at sea,

Indeed that will be a disaster and a monstrous catastrophe,  

Specialize if necessary, you artful aphorist,

Quite unlike Thomas Young the skillful generalist and versatilist,  

The limits of knowledge must be known, fathomed and understood serenely,

Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater catastrophically,

Take what is good and improvise,

That is the counsel of the prudent and the wise,

Think far and push the visible boundaries and push the envelope,

Be bridges and build bridges as the harbinger of bright hope,

Break all shackles of fossilized convention,

And you will automatically thwart all unholy opposition,

Your biases artfully rein in and your powers of self-help master,

Understand the Dunning Kruger effect in all seriousness and infer,

The true power of calculated and managed intelligence capture,

And you will break all barriers and shatter the glass ceiling too,

We are not born with a silver spoon,

We do not inherit a golden cup,

The dreary shadows of darkness are but temporary,

Shadows of dogma and shadows of skepticism lay down their arms wicked and icy,

It will all eventually be yours the esteemed and relished pantheon of glory,

Therefore dabble, delight and dawdle in your cherished whims if necessary,

Dabble in the weird and the out of the ordinary,

Don’t at any rate and come rain or shine lose your originality,

Be unique, be different, and if necessary be a generalist,

And at the same time, also where necessary be a specialist,

At the same time my intimate friend,

Latch your wagon to a distant and yet invisible star,

And at your feet will land a dancing star,

Amplify your strengths and work around your weaknesses,

Find your passion, your love and your fervent calling,  

And revel indolently in your obsessions,

Frenzied thinking and enigmatic puzzles are your prized possessions,

Challenge norms and challenge stereotypes,

And be prepared to half-lose your mind,

To each his own chaos,

To each his own madness,

Labour and toil if necessary alone,

In order to find the philosopher’s stone,

Let people think you are all cracked up to be and loony,

Even as you revel in a richly deserved moment of epiphany,

Your fruits a richly forested tapestry,

You are endowed with the genius gene,

Divergent thinkers often beat raw and unfiltered geniuses,

In the dead heat game of competitive drudgery,

Lost in the lonely tedium of monotony,

The naked truth is that only the legacies of independent thinkers shall modify and inherit the earth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hindutvavaadins: Their technology, their science, their fraud

Hindutvavaadins: Their technology, their science, their fraud

How Hindutravaadins misrepresent Indian history and damage science in the process

 No theory presently exists that posits a European origin for IE languages. Both the Anatolian and Kurgan hypothesis posit an Asian origin for IE languages, not a European one. Even the multi-PIE hypothesis presented as a part of this paper postulates an urheimat which was spread from south central Asia to Western Asia. What Eurocentrism can be found here, given the fact that all theories call for a migration of IE speakers into Old Europe? A summary of points negating the OIT or an Indian homeland for IE languages have been presented in this paper, and readers may go through the relevant 79 sections to assess for themselves whether these are plausible. No one accuses all VIT or OIT supporters of fanaticism. Many scholars have presented the VIT and the OIT, which, for many reasons are untenable, in good faith, and among them, were doyens of the caliber of S R Rao. It is the approach of rabid Hindutva proponents, one which usually excludes all meaningful debate and a comprehensive assessment of issues, that is quite worrisome, and the key components of the Hindutva approach is presented below: 

1. Shouting out against a myth, an obsolete or a half-imaginary theory i.e. The Aryan Invasion theory (which should have been abandoned before it actually was-or at least the fact that it was abandoned should have been communicated properly to all affected or concerned parties). This was the chief strategy of Hindutva revisionists in the 1990’s and the early 2000’s, and was usually a ploy to promote Hindutva theories such as the VIT. In any case, no present-day scholar anywhere in the world subscribes to the AIT anymore. Therefore, a criticism of the Aryan Invasion theory is wholly irrelevant from a Twenty-first century standpoint. As Romila Thapar points out in the article “Hindutva and history” (Frontline, Volume 17, issue 30, Sept 30-Oct 13, 2000) “Why then do Hindutva ideologues - Indian and non-Indian - keep flogging a dead horse and refuse to consider the more recent alternative theories? For them the only alternative is that if the Aryans were not invaders, they must have been indigenous. That there is a range of possibilities between the two extremes of invaders or indigenous does not interest them. The insistence on the indigenous origin of the Aryans allows them to maintain that the present-day Hindus are the 80 lineal descendants of the Aryans and the inheritors of the land since the beginning of history. This then requires that the presence of the Aryans be taken back into earliest history. Hence the attempt to prove, against the prevailing evidence from linguistics and archaeology, that the authors of the Rigveda were the people of the Indus cities or were possibly even prior to that.” As Witzel says of N S Rajaram (EJVS, Volume 7, (2001), issue 2 (March 31) “As Rajaram's star dimmed, however, renewed beating began of a much more ancient dead horse -- the Aryan Invasion Theory ("AIT") -- of which, 50 years after the theory's heyday, I am fantasized by Rajaram et al. as the archetypal Western champion.” 

2. Confusing immigration with invasion (i.e. deliberately) is another tactic of Hindutva proponents. A definition of the two terms can be found in any English dictionary. A very morbid fear of complex acculturation models – these have become extremely complex in the recent past, and can explain all aspects of Indian culture well – also characterizes Hindutva. As Witzel points out, “K (Kazanas) does not have a firm grasp on the complexity of the AIT discussion; he confuses, like Elst, invasion (intentionally) with immigration, trickling in etc.; this leaves all disturbing details by the wayside and simplifies his job enormously: always beating down the straw man, 'invasions', as in his elaborate Norman example! In fact, his summary (p. 22) § 19 reads like a farce... (Ruckspiegel, Pratibimba, Rear view mirror “The Kazanas fiasco” (7/5/2001)). Dr Robert Zydenbos, who has unequivocally stated that he does not support the idea of an invasion, only immigration, has spoken very strongly against Hindutva tactics and calls AIT-bashing “shouting out against a myth”. (He has likewise been fantasized 81 by Hindutva proponents to be an archetypal AIT supporter, which, as stated above, he is not.) Zydenbos very categorically states “"In recent years, certain persons in India have revived a 'debate' over what is known as the Aryan Invasion Theory. Basically, this oversimplified and outdated theory says that the original speakers of Indo-European languages (Sanskrit and its derivatives), the Aryans, were invaders who overran the subcontinent, destroying older civilizations and subjugating the peoples of those earlier civilizations. Although certain elements of this old theory still hold good (such as the origin of the Indo-Aryan, i.e., Indian branch of the Indo-European language family being outside the Indian subcontinent), no up-to-date academician today takes the whole of the old theory as valid." (‘A Hindutva polemic’, by Robert Zydenbos) 

3. The general Hindutva obsession with the issue of whether the “Aryans” came from inside or outside India, to the exclusion of all other serious problems facing Indology. This is irrelevant to history because identities can keep changing from generation to generation, and as immigrants could only have been extremely small in number (it is also virtually impossible that they identified themselves as ‘Aryans’), they would have lost their identity long ago. The question of immigration or non-immigration is practically irrelevant from any standpoint, more so given that only small groups of people were involved, and should not interest anyone except a small group of specialists. Very few can even deny that people of this kind are not interested in history but in politics. The “Aryans” migrated to Iran and other parts of the world as well, but nobody creates a hue and cry there. Witzel has, time and again, pointed out that the term ‘Aryan’ only has a 82 cultural connotation in the RV. Hindutva protagonists deliberately introduce covert shenanigans and proffer dubious arguments to mislead the laity and the gullible. 

4. Let us assume momentarily that the Aryan Invasion theory did exist in the popular public consciousness till 2005. We give them this liberty as there unquestionably has been a failure from many sides. The BJP and their cohorts have however, killed it in polemical style since; now that the RSS and their ignominious cronies have killed it off, why shout about it after they themselves have pronounced its death? Anyone who shouts out against the defunct AIT will be declared politically motivated. 

5. Hindutva proponents are, if all these arguments are taken into account, very clearly not interested in history or have no love for history for history’s sake: The history of the Gangetic plains was, and is being researched by scholars such as F.E Pargiter, Smith, Rau, Witzel and several others. Hard-core Hindutva proponents will not be interested in history because it will conflict with their ideology. 

6. We also draw our readers’ attention to the Indus script fiasco: In 2004, Steve Farmer proposed that the Indus script was not a script at all. This provoked several angry reactions from Western and Indian scholars. Scholars of many different hues and colours objected. These included several truth-seekers and lovers of science and history. Among the Indian scholars who very strongly objected were Rajesh Rao, S Kalayanaraman, Mayank Vahia, Nisha Yadav and Iravatham Mahadevan. One may like to draw to attention of Hindutvavaadins’ 83 role in this fiasco. Hindutva proponents, (they will, of course, go deliberately unnamed) were conspicuously absent even as most Western scholars defended the Indus script theory on behalf of Indian scholars and researchers; the reason for this would be quite clear to most impartial observers: The Indus script is very clearly outside the purview of Hindutva. This speaks volumes about their patriotism and clearly exposes the shallowness of the Hindutva ideology. 

7. Equating a sub-sect of Hinduism to the whole of Hinduism and then equating Hinduism to the whole of India is an obvious tactic adopted by proponents of Hindutva ideology. The term Hinduism is itself a mirage, because it is recent in origin, and the obvious objective of all Hindutva strategies is to demonize Christians and Muslims. It would be obvious to most that Hindutva is nothing but crass and degenerate Brahminism of the worst kind. While few will deny that Brahminism has contributed in a major way to what is what is today known as Hinduism, and Sanskrit has played a major role in the cultural and linguistic unification of India in a manner no other language could have, given the fact that it was primarily a lingua franca of the elite in post-Harappan India, Hinduism does not comprise of Brahminism alone. This would be very greatly undermining the diversity of Indic religious traditions. Proponents of extreme versions of Hindutva will also never talk about Sanathana Dharma. The reasons for this are not too far to seek: Hindutva has nothing whatsoever to do with the capaciousness of Sanathana Dharma or the tolerance or the innate respect for diversity enshrined therein. 

8. When it was proposed that the IVC could not have been Vedic, Hindutvaadins began introducing a crude “is “mine” older” or “is “theirs” older” competition .i.e. Vedic civilization is pre-IVC theory. This type of an approach does not qualify as a science at all; Hindutva relies on history to promote its political ideology. No more, no less. 

 9. Using the services of foreigners who probably cannot understand the complexity of Indian culture to promote Hindutva. Employing the services of foreign scholars has been a key component of the Hindutva approach. 

10. Using the perceived weaknesses and irrationality of Marxist historiography as an excuse for promoting the Hinduvta movement. Readers are welcome to read the writings of Marxist Historians such as D.N Jha, for example, and assess for themselves whether they are unbiased or not. Remember the golden rule, “One kind of bias provides a justification for every other kind of bias” (scholars of this type are as guilty as Hindutva proponents themselves because such scholarship throws up counter-reactions and only leads to a polarization of views). If the menace of Hindutva is to be contained, balanced scholarship is the only way. The only difference between these groups of people is that the former is driven entirely by the desire to boost sectarian pride, the latter by dogma. The day may even come when people of this type are declared to be as guilty and as inimical to national interest as Hindutva proponents themselves. However, Hindutva proponents use such ideology-driven approaches as a pretext to promote their own theories. Using Dravidian nationalism as an excuse to promote Hindutva is another Hindutva technique, and Dravidian nationalism will almost certainly perpetuate the Hindutva menace, and therefore, a change in attitude from all sides is warranted. A desire to boost sectarian pride will never get people very far; it breeds counter-reactions always. Dravidian Harappa proponents must always be willing to take contradictory evidence into account, and must present their ideas only if they are convinced that they are correct. Sentimental approaches make people nutty. Of what use is a proposal if it does not stand the test of time or if the targeted audience makes a mockery of it? Using Euro centrism as an excuse to promote Hindutva is also a well-known Hindutva strategy. Read posts in ‘IndoEurasian research list’ for example, and the day may even come when people of this type are declared to be as guilty and as inimical to science as Hindutva proponents themselves. Many scholars, both Western and Indian, have been critical of this type of an approach. Farmer’s approach has been undermine the hard-work put in by scores of American, European and Indian scholars in uncovering India’s past. While no scholar, Western or Indian will oppose a quest for the truth, few would deny that Farmer’s approach is loaded with bias and prejudice, and this fact was tacitly acknowledged by Farmer himself in a post in the ‘Indo-Eurasian research list’. (We say this not because of any antipathy but to drive home a point. We say this in the interests of science and scholarship.) This approach is dangerous for many reasons 

(a) it sets a bad precedent not only for Indology but for other sciences as well. 

(b) it undermines the hard work put in by American, European and Indian researchers, makes a mockery of objective scholarship, and results in a loss of confidence in mainstream scholarship, 86 particularly Western scholarship in Indology, which at the time of writing this article, may already be in very steep decline. This is unfortunate, because most moderate Indians insist on an East-west collaboration in Indology as well as a major role to be played by the west as this would be crucial to the containment of religious fanaticism and other kinds of ideology-driven approaches. People of this type are therefore, typically not India’s problem. They are America’s problem, and a problem of the West, because they give American and Western science a bad name, and this is distressing, more so because the West has much to benefit from it financially and intellectually. While Steve Farmer may be no friend of India, it is clear that is no friend of science and objectivity either, and while we acknowledge their contributions in tackling the Hindutva menace, they owe their existence almost entirely to Marxist dogma in India and well-entrenched cabals that would like the Nineteenth century school of Indology to continue in some form or the other. 

(c) such approaches automatically lead to a polarization of views and as long as such approaches continue, Hindutva will almost certainly exist. Farmer’s approach has also been to “corrupt” scholars of the caliber of Witzel and Dr Richard Sproat, whether they may be individually guilty or not, and it is most sad that this has been allowed to happen, to the detriment of science. His approach has also always been to drag Indology backwards, in the direction of the Nineteenth century, parading it as objectivity. One may read the so-called Indo-Eurasian research list if he likes. We say this not because we have any hatred against him at a personal level. We say this because it stymies progress in many areas and produces counter-reactions. All this is ephemeral and transient; 87 such digressions cannot last long and will ultimately be left by the wayside. Many new epigraphic and archeological discoveries are being made constantly in the subcontinent. The IER, with its apparent bias and racism is not a place where new discoveries are analyzed and discussed, although Witzel may, individually, not be entirely guilty, as Steve Farmer may have been largely responsible for his degradation over the past few years, and at times have made an earnest attempt to bring order into to the mayhem, at other times being swayed by his assistant. If, on the other hand, they are willing to change, and turn over a new leaf, everyone must welcome it. This approach is like Katherine Mayo’s in her much-maligned 1927 book ‘Mother India’ i.e. to take anything that may be of some pride to locals and negate it, to give Western culture an upper hand. Can this kind of an approach survive in the longer run? We leave it to the lay-man to decide. The plight of colonialism is well-known. One of her fixations was Indian cultures’ imagined cruelty towards animals. Is this true, in comparison to other cultures given that many Indian sects abhor cruelty towards animals in any form? Given that Western universities depend on Indian students, India-bashing of this kind, in the guise of scholarship is not a bad business strategy, it is anachronism. Archaic Western scholarship had for long depended on Marxist dogma to propagate imperialism. All this will change in the next decade as both get consigned to the rubbish-heap of history. On the other hand, what contribution did Hindutva proponents make in exposing this bias? Absolutely nothing, in the view of most. This may be because they are not interested in anything that is outside the purview of AIT-bashing! This is by now a hackneyed, and a stale old trick, and would now even appear ludicrous to most. What other tricks do Hindutvavaadins have in their stable? Their approaches clearly reflect their narrow and parochial mindset. Hindutva will not survive if like-minded individuals create and awareness among the larger sections of the public. On the other hand the fact the viable alternatives do not exist means that Hindutva is a ticking time-bomb. Hindutvavaadins, sensing mainstream scholarships imminent demise, are waiting on the wings to take over. 

11. Using the fact that current approaches to Indology are considered to be hopelessly obsolete to their full advantage instead of opting for via media solutions. There can be no smoke without fire; Hindutva proponents managed to wrest control of institutions such as the Indian Council of Historical research because there is a failure from all sides. Older Indologists must understand the limitations and drawbacks of obsolete models and Marxist historians must similarly understand that they must take a major portion of the blame. Marxists historians have argued that all schools of historiography have been encouraged. This is wrong, because dogmatic scholarship such as those always attributed to Marxist historians throw up counter-reactions. Marxists themselves are legitimizing Hindutva. As long as dogmatic Marxist historiography exists, Hindutva will continue to exist. We will even argue that dogmatic Marxist historiography is one of the pillars of Hindutva. The approach must be to marginalize Hindutva, not to give it a reason to exist. Only people who are free from ideology or dogma will have the moral and ethical right to speak out against Hindutva. Only the abandonment of their ideology will give them enormous power and the ethical and moral right to criticize other ideologies as well. While 89 there may be no consensus on most or many issues even among the so-called Marxist intelligentsia, the fact that there is a clear and an illogical and an irrational bias among some sections of the left is visible and apparent to most logical thinkers. This, of course may be a purely ideology-driven one, and not necessarily one driven by an intention to deceive. When a Warangal-based student painted Hindu deities in the nude, he was supported, as it was artistic freedom. The same was the case with M F Hussein. When the Dutch cartoon controversy erupted, the response was tragically and quite drastically different. We only demand that all sections of the intelligentsia take a common stance regardless of religion. A section of the left intelligentsia categorically stated that they would not condone fanaticism of any kind, irrespective of whether it was Hindu or Islamic. This kind of a pronouncement is always welcome, but must be followed up with action consistently. A change is nonetheless perceptible, and this will serve to bring people on all sides of the table together one day, regardless of ideology. The Marxist magazine ‘Frontline’ criticized the Varanasi bomb blasts, and rightfully so. Even former hardliners like Prakash Karat have apparently learnt to change with the times. This kind of a change in approach is welcome, and would actually be beneficial to the interests of scholarship. This cannot however be said of all sections of the left, and one may do his or her own homework to assesses whether this statement is substantiated. We will differentiate between the left, the far left (the differences being the degree of ideology), and what we may call the disoriented and antediluvian far left, which is essentially driven by dogma. At least the third category has to change, and the author is of the firm conviction that 90 this can eventually happen. If this does, Hindutva will be marginalized. We will always say, ‘one kind of a bias legitimizes every other kind of bias.’ We will also be looking forward to a quantification of bias and prejudice of all kinds, and this is an exercise interested scholars must undertake. This can be done only by proving Hindutva and Marxist dogma empirically, analyzing Hindutva and Marxist writers and their works thoroughly, that we can lay the foundations for a more objective school of Indology. We will look forward to such works from scholars in the near future. Remember the golden rule: Absence of a male fide intention can be no excuse. The road to hell can be paved with the best of intentions. If dogmatic Marxist historians still wish to persist, others must declare them to be anti-science and anti-national just as Hindutva is declared anti-science and anti-national. Mainstream Western and Indian scholars are equally guilty because they persist with outdated paradigms. Marxist scholars have clearly made no effort whatsoever to expose Farmer’s bias in the IER even though it is as damaging to science as Hinduva misuse of history. Clearly, dogmatic Marxist historiography of the kind practiced in India is biased, one-sided and irrational, and due to this, we declare them anti-national in some respects, even though they may have no mala fide intentions per se. The fact that their approach is one-sided has been pointed out by many other scholars and we are certainly not the first to have done so. In many cases, they may be working against national interest, and in what cases they are working against national interest, they themselves may have no control, given that they may be entirely driven by dogma, unlike that approach that should be ideally adopted by logical-thinking individuals. As has been pointed out Marxist historiography has become synonymous with obsolescence and senility, and this kind of an approach cannot even continue beyond one or two generations, and will lead to depleted intellectual faculties, illogical and irrational behavior, loss of personal respect and dignity, lowered level of professional competence, and such individuals may frequently act against national interest and interests of science and will inflict, like Hindutva, damage on the education system as well. We will persist with this categorization, however provocative it may seem, till they change, or can at least provide a convincing refutation backed by data. We can still find Western and Indian scholars talking about the terms ‘Aryan’ and ‘Dravidian’ in a racial context, and arguing facetiously for second millennium BC migrations, for example. All this needs to change, as they can be pronounced guilty for encouraging Hindutva. Modernization of Indology is the only surefire method to nip Hindutva in the bud before it evolves into a Frankenstein monster of uncontrollable proportions and devours objective scholarship completely in the next couple of years. Those who do not want such a thing to happen must forge a consensus to found a new school of Indology. This must happen as soon as possible because we are leaving too many things open to risk, and the loss of objectivity in scholarship will be to the major detriment of the west. Marxist intellectuals rightly criticized Hindutva and their endeavours that culminated in the containment of Hindutva must be highly appreciated. However, by persisting with outdated paradigms, Marxist intellectuals are actually encouraging imperialism and racism. Marxist historiography is one-sided, and India is none the better for it. Hindutva misuse 92 of history may be a reaction to Marxist historiography. Needless to say, Hindutva proponents have a vested interest in promoting their own ideology, not just criticizing Marxist historiography because it may be biased, and the result of one kind of bias is that it produces an unequal counter-reaction, the end-result being far worse than the relatively innocuous Marxist dogma that may have produced it in the first place. Both ideologies i.e. the Marxist-imperialist nexus and Hindutva may have actually depended on each other for survival, even to some extent providing a stimulus and a raison d’etre for both. One ideology cannot be a substitute for another. The best antidote for Hindutva fascism is objective scholarship, not any other form of ideology; the latter will be clearly exacerbating it more in the longer run. All students who wish to join Indology courses in mainstream institutions must become a harbinger of change by insisting that obsolete paradigms be abandoned forthwith. The nineteenth century school of Indology will have a vested interest in prolonging its existence, and those who subscribe to it may have an emotional attachment to it that is not in the long-term interests of scholarship. Scholarship is global, not local. By resorting to tactics such as these, Western scholarship will not only be digging its own grave (this will be sad as it has contributed so much and the rest of the world has still so much to benefit from Western scholarship) but will also be producing counterreactions that will undermine its own well-being. 

12. Taking full advantage of the fact that the man in the street cannot understand or will not be interested in understanding the complexity of the Aryan problem, given that this is a topic dealt with in the ordinary course of events, only by a small group of specialists, and using his historical naivety in this respect to their advantage. Hindutva strategies are extremely complex, albeit somewhat stale now, and those who understand them must expose them in the interests of the greater good of society. It is of paramount importance that the masses, or at least a sliver of intellectuals be educated on Hindutva strategies, and modern paradigms and alternative approaches must be similarly widely disseminated to the masses and it will help contain the menace of Hindutva.

Leave a legacy behind, my dear friend

 

Leave a legacy behind, my dear friend

An all original poem by Sujay Rao Mandavilli                                 

 

Indeed the term legacy is misunderstood highly,

Even though people may claim to have fathomed it all vainly,

Legacies may multifaceted and multidimensional be,

Legacies may also large and substantial be,

Insignificant and trivial to some degree,

Tangible or intangible indeed,

Positive or negative veritably,

Pleasant and transformational suitably,

Intellectual or non-intellectual veraciously,

Ambitious, beneficial and non-ambiguous,

Or utterly odious and noxious,

This may be so to a large degree,

Either incorporating or not incorporating a fervent desire to grow and to give,

Therefore giving and yielding either expectedly or unexpectedly,                                                                        

To the wider public and general society,

Or in some case to near and dear ones only,

We only categorize them neatly and conveniently to suit our whim and our fancy,

And compartmentalization itself may be a logical fallacy,            

Many great men were but crooks and wretches,

Along with their unfortunate thumping boys, lackeys, lapdogs and stooges,

As was also sadly and unfortunately the case with all slothful and indolent slouches,   

And also with traitors and knaves that were, and are not to be trusted,

Let us on the other hand innovate and grow,

And our talents and flair demonstrate and show,

Don’t misuse your divinely granted powers if that is the case,

As most evil people in the world certainly did abase,

Clans, confederates and their chieftains too,

Reveling in their pedigree,

As they tumbled and fell from their elevated and elated apogee,

From the not so benign conquerors Genghis Khan or Timur the Lame,

Or the evils carried out in Stalin’s or Hitler’s name,

Even the evils associated with the great leap forward, if that is the name,                

And the horrors of Idi Amin and Pol Pot infame,

Ivan the terrible,

And all assorted and miscellaneous dictators wicked and horrible,

These are all cruel misadventures and wicked wrongdoings all the same, 

Just like Hannibal the wicked and dictator Mussolini,

However and contrarily, like those dealt by the benign likes of Mandela, Ambedkar, and Gandhi,

Legacy must be beneficial,

Make life useful, productive and not superficial,

Be worthy of the seriousness of life,

Do not degenerate it into a cauldrife,

Make life worth living,

And dedicate it to service and giving,

Don’t waste your life in banter,

Don’t waste your life in gossip and slander,

In idleness, gossip and tittle tattle,

Or needless prattle,

Don’t waste your life in machinations,

Don’t become schemsters or schemstresses, 

Don’t become manipulators,               

Dedication and commitment, those are our devoirs,

High living and high thinking are necessary adjuncts and concomitants for the intellect,

From useless tasks and meaningless rituals life we must resurrect,

Of what use is poring over others success stories mindlessly,

And amble and meander along aimlessly,                 

Let us not become visionless,

Or ambitionless and directionless,

Let us not our hopes and our chances torpedo,

And let us not in the least lose our drive or our mojo,

Up your ante and up your sails,

Let’s set new directions and blaze new trials,

Let us not into the concealing bosom of ineptitude precipitate,

Or from the righteous and unwavering hand of veracity and facticity deviate,

Let us not into some random and repugnant corner huddle,

Let detractors and sycophants us not bamboozle or mollycoddle,

Step out of your comfort zone,

And your skills and talents do hone,

Don’t hush your souls,

Or with depleted low self-esteem crawl,

And be contented with a random brawl,

Let us not wallow in run off the mill approaches,

Nor to say the least in dyed in the wool approaches,

Bester yourself and create,

Ruminate, ponder and investigate,                              

Therefore, redouble your efforts, cogitate and innovate,            

 

Life should be great rather than long,  

Travel light and be agile,

Don’t be infecund or sterile,

Life is no song,

Ambition, aspiration, perseverance, and hard work make it all, 

Not destiny,          

Not pettiness and all forms of niggardliness sundry,

Only positive forces cement you against the trauma of any catastrophic fall,

Accumulate nothing,

Amass nothing,

Yet, dream big,

And keep on imagining big,

Dream long and wide,                          

Think straightforwardly and harbor no snide,

Do not your well-meaning and well-intentioned compatriots deride,

Simple living must count,

High thinking must abound,

Hitch your wagon to a star,

Yet be kind and avuncular,

Don’t waste your life in pursuits trivial and hedonistic,

Live a life that is event-filled and altruistic,

Life but comes only once and never again,

Justify your presence on earth, all things done and said,  

People with humble moorings have left great wealth behind,

Why cannot we do so too in our turn, my dear friend?

When death creeps in, and when we rust,

And when we inevitably and invariably bite the dust,  

All that will be left is our formidable legacy,

And the actions and the deeds of the just,

Chiseled and crafted for posterity,

And preserved elegantly and meticulously for eternity,

Kings, monarchs, and emperors may in their due turn fall,

But creators and generators of legacies shall stand tall,                                            

Only high thoughts and high deeds make man a man,

Only high thoughts and high deeds differentiate a hapless and a dispossessed creature from a true man.