Re: To SRC regulars....
- From: Straydog <asd@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 07:49:47 -0500
On Tue, 27 Feb 2006, Kamal R. Prasad wrote:
Old Pif wrote:Straydog wrote:
So, how many of you guys would like to see SRC get moderated?
that may not be because of tribal mentality. Have you observed that it
almost always costs more to hire a white/american than an Indian? It is
possible that mgmt has instructed him to hire Indians and that he has
been hired in the first place to facilitate that. I have come across
references to americans as greedy pigs who demand too much for their
services.
And, you have no "greedy pigs" in India? I've read many reports now of Indians switching jobs at Indian companies in India, high turnover, and companies luring employees from another company, and wages/salaries going up 30% per year. Is that how you think? Only employees are greedy? YOu never see employers offering more money to get a guy to quit his present job and take a higher offer?
You see, that is all you do: you make posts which are 90-95% anti-American, 90-95% pro-India, 99% ignore the rest of the world, and what about the Dalits in your society (see the discussion near the end of the article below for India-related nasty poltics all involving Indians).
=============================
Wall Street Journal: Weds, Jan 25, 2006 FRONT PAGE
"New Battleground In Textbook Wars: Religion in History"
by Daniel Golden
This is all about how special interest groups like to influence the
guys who write the textbooks. One case was that some Jews did
not like some things being said, so the authors changed that. Next,
some Moslems thought they were definitely being portrayed as
being too violent, militaristic, murderous, too much emphasis on
wars in their past. OK, tone that down. Now, wait till you read
about what was in the last two thirds of the article (see below).
(I typed it all, the quote below, from my copy of the WSJ)
Quote (no parts are deleted, this is continuous)
Disputes over textbook portrayal of Hinduism are a staple of
politics in India, and the concerns have arrived in American along
with many Indian immigrants. The conventional view of ancient
India in U.S. history texts is that men enjoyed more rights than
women and that, then as now, Hindus worshipped many gods and
were divided into castes.
But the Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation,
the educational arm of a Hindu temple in Austin, Texas, say
Hinduism is monotheistic because all of its deities are aspects of
one god, Brahmin. So when one textbook referred to Hindus
visiting temples to 'express their love of the gods,' this should be
changed to 'express their love for God,' said the Vedic Group.
The groups repeatedly proposed deleting references to the caste
system and making other changes that burnished the image of
Indian history and culture. For instance, McGraw-Hill's book said
of an early monarch called Asoka that his "tollerance was unusual
for the time." The Hindu Education Foundation suggested
changing "unusual" to "usual."
next section had the subtitle: 'Source of Misunderstanding'
At the Vedic Foundation, 'Our motto is to re-establish the
greatness of Hinduism, and part of that is to correct the
textbooks,' says Janeshwari Devi, director of programs. 'Those are
a source of misunderstanding, prejudice and derogatory
information.'
Some Hindu students say they're humiliated in school because
texts dwell on customs such as ostracism of untouchables and an
old tradition, rarely observed today [my note: meaning that
although it is rare, it still goes on], of 'sati'--widows immolating
[my note: burning in fire] themselves on their husbands' funeral
pyres. Trisha Pasricha, a high school junior in a Houston suburb,
says she used to deny being Hindu to classmates because she was
tired of refuting stereotypes perpetuated by textbooks and
teachers. 'The textbooks bring up all these obscure practices, like
bride burning, and act like they happen every day,' she says. 'The
biggest mistake is that Hinduism is portrayed as polytheistic. And
the caste system has nothing to do with Hinduism. But no one
believes you, because its in the textbook.'
But some prominent scholars, both non-Hindu and Hindu, say the
books were right. According to Madhav Deshpande, a Sanscrit
professor at teh Univesity of Michigan who is Hindu, Hinduism is
polytheistic and linked to the caste system, and women did have
inferior status in ancient India.
He says the Hindu groups hold a mistaken position that dates to
when India was ruled by Britain in the 19th century and under
pressure from Christian missionaries. The missionaries told
prospective converts to Christianity was superior because it had
one god, treated women fairly, and didn't have castes, Mr.
Deshpande says, adding that to counter, Hindu intellectuals made
up an argument that their religion had once been the same way.
The foundations' contention that the caste system developed
separately from Hinduism is incorrect, he maintains, because 'in
ancient texts, there is no distinction between the religious and
nonreligious domains of life.'
Jackson Spielvogel, a retired Penn State professor and author of
McGraw-Hill's _Ancient Civilizations_ textbook, says, 'You can't
allow Hindu nationalists to rewrite the history of India.... It
becomes an issue of censorship.'
To review changes proposed by the Hindu groups, California
hired and expert recommended by one of the groups: Shiva
Bajpai, a retired California State University history professor. He
endorsed most of the changes. 'I want to recognize the negatives
but project the positives,' says Mr. Bajpai, who is Hindu.
With his blessing, the changes were rolling toward ratification by
the state board when Harvard's Prof. Witzel unexpectedly
intervened. Alerted by an Indian-American graduate student
whom the Vedic Foundation approached to support its changes,
Mr. Witzel wrote to the board the day before a Nov. 8 meeting at
which approval of the Hindu-backed changes was expected. 'They
are unscholarly [and] politically and religiously motivated,' wrote
Mr. Witzel, a Sanskrit professor. His letter was co-signed by
nearly 50 scholars, including Mr. Deshpande of Michigan.
Mr. Witzel calls the Hindu Education Foundation a front for a
prominent nationalist group in India, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak
Sangh, whose leader caused a stir in November by urging Hindu
women to have more children to keep up with the Muslim growth
rate. A spokesman for the Hindu Education Foundation
acknowledges a connection--it was established by the U.S.
counterpart of the Indian group--but says it acts independently.
State officials did an about-face after they got Mr. Witzel's letter,
inviting him and two like-minded scholars to scrutinize Mr.
bajpai's recommendations. When the three advised restoring much
of the textbooks' original wording, angry letters began pouring in
from Hindu groups. One, the Hindu American Foundation,
threatened to sue the state. A petition from Hindu advocates
called on Harvard to end its association with 'Aryan Supremacist
Creationist hate mongering.' Harvard responded by defending Mr.
Witzel's academic freedom.
The groups persuaded two members of California's congressional
delegation to weigh in. Rep. Pete Stark, a Unitarian, and Rep.
Linda Sanchez, a Catholic, asked the state superintendent of
public instruction to investigate Mr. Witzel. The superintendent
replied that the state had already held three public hearings on the
history texts, received more than 1,000 pages of testimony, and
considered more than 800 textual changes.
The pendulum swung back on Dec 2, when the Curriculum
Commission voted to support most of the changes sought by the
Hindu foundations. 'We have to err on the side of sensitivity
toward religion,' a commission member, Stan Metzenberg, said at
the time.
The game wasn't over. Other Hindu groups--including members of
the 'untouchables' caste--entered the fray on Mr. Witzel's behalf.
The Dalit Freedom Network, an advocacy group for
untouchables, wrote to the education board that the proposed
Vedic and Hindu Education Foundation changes reflect "a view of
Indian history that softens...the violent truth of caste-based
discrimination in India....Do not allow politically-minded
revisionists to change Indian history.'[my note: and Kamal Prasad
has the nerve to talk about slavery as if it was only done in the USA].
Caught in the cross=fire the board of education summoned Mr.
Witzel and Mr. Bajpai to an unusual private session Jan 6. Before
the board and commission members, staffers and the board's
lawyer, the scholars debated each edit.
'It was a gladiator combat,' Mr. Bajpai recalls, 'the most
acrimonious thing I have ever done in my entire life. It
deteriorated into me telling him he didn't understand anything.'
Mr. Witzel says Mr. BAjpai 'mixed his religion with scholarship.'
The due did reach consensus on some changes. The agreed to
narrow the McGraw-Hill text's statement that men in ancient India
had "more rights" than women to "more property rights"--but not
to the Hindu groups' preferred wording of "different" rights.
Still, it isn't certain that compromises reached by the two scholars
will stand. At a meeting Jan. 12, the state board of education
created a subcommittee to reconsider the matter--and to prepare
for still more religious pressure when books are expected to be
added to thelist in two years.
end of quote, end of article
.
- References:
- To SRC regulars....
- From: Straydog
- Re: To SRC regulars....
- From: Old Pif
- Re: To SRC regulars....
- From: Kamal R. Prasad
- To SRC regulars....
- Prev by Date: Re: modern science = underfunded projects
- Next by Date: Re: To SRC regulars....
- Previous by thread: Re: To SRC regulars....
- Next by thread: Re: To SRC regulars....
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
