November 09 2009
The most potent and powerful instrument of education — Primary, Secondary and Higher Education — has been viciously abused by the Government of India and all the State Governments after our independence only to deface, deny and destroy the spiritual, religious and cultural identity — nay, soul — of Bharatvarsha. This irrefutable fact has been clearly brought out in bold relief in a graphic and telling manner by two brilliant authors Professor Makhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit in their outstanding book titled ‘EDUCATING TO CONFUSE AND DISRUPT: Defiling History and Education System of India’. I can see that both of them are great patriots dedicated to the service of Bharat Mata, in the age-old tradition of Sanatana Dharma envisioned by Sri Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, Swami Vivekananda and Sri Aurobindo.
|Front cover of the book|
This book has been published by India First Foundation, New Delhi. This great publishing house is rendering unmatched and unsurpassed national service in the field of publishing great books bringing out all facets of Bharatvarsha’s eternal heritage and how it is under a planned siege by the inimical and anti-national forces of Macaulayism, Marxism, Mullaism, Missionaryism and Nehruvian pseudo-secularism, with the full political and official support of the government of India today.
After the conquest of North-Western India by Mohammad Ghori in 1194 AD India entered the Dark Ages of Islam. Similarly, after nine hundred years, India is again going through the Dark Age of Sonia Congress sponsored Pan-Islamic and Pan-Christian evangelical anti-Hindu pseudo-secularism. In this nation-soul-destroying period of encircling gloom, the great nation-building and patriotic books published by India First Foundation are serving as beacon lights of hope, encouragement and enlightenment for the beleaguered Hindus of India. This becomes very relevant and important particularly in today’s context of the united resolve and determination of the pseudo-secular mafia of English mass media in India, to totally shut out from public view all the wholesome and positive aspects of India’s spiritual and cultural heritage derived from the Vedas, the Upanishads, the great Epics like the Ramayana and the Mahabharata and other sacred Hindu scriptures.
In this context I would like to refer to some very important and relevant publications of India First Foundation such as, ‘India’s Cultural nationalism’ by Purnima Singh, ‘Eternal India and the Constitution’ by S. Gurumurthy, ‘Zero is Not the Only Story: Ancient India’s Contribution to Modern Science’ by Dr P. Priyadarshi, ‘Marxism and the Writing of Indian History’ by Shankar Saran, ‘Sonia under Scrutiny’ by A. Surya Prakash, ‘Supreme Court on Hindutva: Extracts and Comments’ Edited by Bal Apte and ‘Secularism as Minoritism : Highway to Harakiri’ Edited by Rajendra Dixit.
I have no doubt that the famous American woman historian Barbara Tuchman (1912-1989) had great books like the ones brought out by India First Foundation when she wrote as follows about the revolutionary impact of books on human culture and civilization: “Books are the carriers of civilization. Without books, history is silent, literature dumb, science crippled, thought and speculation at a standstill. Without books, the development of civilization would have been impossible. They are agents of change, windows on the world, ‘lighthouses’ (as a poet said) ‘erected in the sea of time’. They are companions, teachers, magicians, bankers of the treasures of the mind. Books are humanity in print.”
I have been greatly inspired by the grand vision which animates the India First Foundation in all their magnificent publishing efforts. According to their Vision Statement, the timeless stream of Indian civilization has been viciously obstructed and impeded for several centuries and more particularly from the days of Arab conquest of Sindh in 712 AD. A very significant fact that is often ignored is that Indian civilization rooted in Sanatana Dharma struggled and survived through the fiery storm of Islamic and European invasion which had blown other nations and civilizations to smithereens. Great Rishis, Mahatmas and other intellectuals of Bharatvarsha, starting from the first quarter of the nineteenth century, made Herculean efforts to revive, revitalise and reassert the voice and soul of our ancient heritage which in the fullness of time created a new national and political awakening, ultimately leading to the attainment of our freedom from the British COLONIAL yoke on 15 August 1947.
Let me now come to the book on national-soul-destroying system of Indian education today, authored by Professor Makhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit Professor Makhan Lal is an archaeologist and historian of world repute. He has taught in Banaras Hindu University and Aligarh Muslim University. He was the first Charles Wallace Fellow in Cambridge University and Senior Fellow at Clare Hall. Currently he is the Founder Director of Delhi Institute of Heritage Research and Management. He has written 9 books and more than 110 research papers.
|Professor Rajendra Dixit|
Professor Rajendra Dixit has served as Professor of English and Head of Department of Education and Dean (Co-ordination) in NCERT, New Delhi. He played a key part in the formulation and framing of National Curriculum Framework for School Education – 2000 (NCFSE) and the preparation of new Textbooks of NCERT from 1999 to 2004. Poetry, language education and teacher education are his main interests.
These two outstanding scholars belonging to two different disciplines have made an interdisciplinary approach to the study of evolution of educational system in India both before and after independence. The adjective interdisciplinary is most often used in educational circles when researchers from two or more disciplines pool their approaches and modify them so that they are better suited to the problem at hand.
All countries which have suffered under the tyranny of colonization or alien political subjugation have had a similar experience — total destruction of their local national system of education, languages, cultural icons, social values, faiths and beliefs, denigration of their past and the wholesale negation of their achievements and glories. Here the words of these two authors are very appropriate: “Whenever some part of India was grabbed by the Muslim invaders, the educational institutions and religious establishments of the land became their victims. The destruction of the educational institutions like Takshashila, Nalanda, Udantpuri and Vikram Shila is too well known to recount here. The dastardly destruction of temples and renowned seats of learning, the imposition of discriminating taxes like the Jazia and the forced choice between the conversion to Islam and cruel executions did certainly dampen the spirit of non-Muslims and demoralized the society in general. How ever, the indomitable soul of India, by and large, remained alive even under the threat of the sword”.
The same sentiments have been echoed by Sri M. R Vaghela in the Hindu Voice, UK; “Ancient faiths like Buddhism and Zoroasterism were almost obliterated from the Middle East, Central Asia and India but the Hindus rose in defiance to emerge even stronger at the end of the blood soaked millennia.”
A death blow to the traditional gurukula system of education in India was given by the British colonial rulers starting from the second decade of the 19th century. Lord Macaulay defined the purpose of the new education system in 1835 in his famous Minute on Education: “Our aim is to create a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals and in intellect”. This was achieved through the introduction of ENGLISH as the MEDIUM of higher education to begin with and this was later extended to both primary and secondary education.
Alongside the introduction of English as a medium of education, the British also simultaneously launched a policy offensive for the complete mental enslavement of the Indian population, denigration and destruction of our country’s history and our native culture, customs, temple traditions, literary and scientific achievements and the like. English educated Indians were strategically used at various levels to proclaim the superiority of British culture, customs and achievements. These cleverly brainwashed, State-favoured Indians were encouraged to ape and emulate the British and look down upon their own countrymen, their own society and their own religion and culture. Such toadies of the British Raj, including the converts to Christianity, were made to feel ashamed of their own hoary past and deride it with gusto. The same policy has been continued by the Congress government of India ever since our independence. The convent educated pseudo-secular Indians are even today ashamed of their national Hindu heritage.
The Patriot-Saint of India, Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902) had clearly indicated this possibility at a public meeting in Madras in 1897: “Shall India die? Then from the world all spirituality will be extinct, all moral perfection will be extinct, all sweet – souled sympathy for religion will be extinct; and in its place will reign the duality of lust and luxury as the male and female deities, with money as its priest, fraud, force and competition its ceremonies, and human soul its sacrifice.”
Professor Makhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit have rightly concluded: “It was with the help of the servile fidelity of these natives that the British ruled over India. Against this backdrop, there developed in the country an education system that was totally devoid of all social, moral and ethical values. It had little concern for and accountability towards, the nation and the native populace. India’s history and heritage were unscrupulously defiled in the new system. The country’s glorious achievements in the realms of science, literature, philosophy and education were either completely written off or distorted beyond recognition. The beginning of the 20th century did, of course, witness some systematic attempts to correct the things and project a clear picture before the nation, but because of the alien control over the policies, programmes and the administration, these efforts failed to go far. Then, it was legitimately hoped that political freedom would ensure the country’s freedom from its education system as well and the ultimate emergence of its glorious history, rich with numerous accounts of achievements of crucial importance”.
November 10 2009
In these columns yesterday (Monday, 9 November 2009), I wrote the first part of my review of the book titled ‘EDUCATING TO CONFUSE AND DISRUPT: Defiling History and Education System of India’, authored by two bold intellectual Kshatriyas — who mercifully are not the usually ignorant servile, spineless, pseudo-secular and anti-Hindu academic vermin sponsored by the government in power— namely, Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit. The fact that this very necessary book has been published at all is a great tribute to the courage, judgement, integrity, defiant national spirit and vision of the publishing house of India First Foundation.
Here I cannot resist quoting certain excerpts from the Vision Statement of India First Foundation: ‘Unfortunately, the ideal of Rama Rajya set by Mahatma Gandhi, which provided the ideological basis of our freedom, became anathema to the post-independent polity, politicians, intellectuals and establishments. EVEN THE GOAL OF THE RAMA RAJYA CAME TO BE REGARDED AS NARROW, SECTARIAN, COMMUNAL AND EVEN OUTRIGHT DANGEROUS. As Swami Vivekananda said, it is given to the Hindus by destiny to discover the idea of Universal Validity of all faiths and ways of life and share it with the rest of the world. This inclusive idea, which vindicates all Gods, faiths, peoples and way of life, is the ultimate destination of the journey of Humanity and the final guarantee for Global and National Peace. And it is in this context and with this background and purpose, some intellectual Kshatriyas have come together to launch one more humble effort through India First Foundation’.
India First Foundation has used the word ‘dangerous’ while referring to RAMA RAJYA of Mahatma Gandhi. I would go a step further and say that in today’s political milieu, it would be viewed in political and official circles of the Government of India as even ‘treasonable and seditious’ warranting the invocation of the Anti Terrorist Act. The recent track record of the ATS in Maharashtra is a pointer in that direction.
These two authors have quoted the following words of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru from his Annual Convocation address at Aligarh Muslim University on 24 January, 1948 to prove their thesis that Nehru was a first rate hypocrite and an opportunistic, a layer upon layer — somersaulter: ‘I am proud of India, not only because of her ancient magnificent heritage, but also because of her remarkable capacity to add to it by keeping the doors and windows of her mind and spirit open to fresh and invigorating winds from distant lands. India’s strength has been two fold: her own innate culture which flowed through the ages, and her capacity to draw from other sources and thus add to her own … I have said that I am proud of our inheritance and our ancestors who gave an intellectual and cultural prominence to India. How do you feel about this past? Do you feel that you are also a sharer in it and inheritance of it and, therefore proud of something that belongs to you as to me? Or do you feel alien to it and pass by it without understanding it or feeling that strange thrill which comes from the realisation that we are the Trustees and inheritors of this vast treasure. I ask you these questions because in recent years many forces have been at play diverting people’s mind into wrong channels and trying to pervert the course of history. YOU ARE A MUSLIM AND I AM A HINDU. We may adhere to different religious faiths or even to none; but that does not take away from that cultural inheritance that is yours as well as mine. The past holds us together; why should the present or the future divide us in spirit?’
Though Pandit Nehru openly declared that he loved the Hindu heritage of India and wanted every one to partake of it, yet in action, unfortunately, he did exactly the opposite thing. For example, when Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel wanted to reconstruct the famed Somnath Temple in Gujarat, Pandit Nehru tried to obstruct it in every possible manner. Similarly when President Rajendra Prasad wanted to participate in the opening ceremony of the newly constructed Somnath Temple, Nehru tried his best to dissuade the President from attending the ceremony in his official capacity, on the specious plea that India is a ‘secular’ country. Committed to his anti-Hindu philosophy of pseudo-secularism, Pandit Nehru performed a perfect act of ‘super-somersault’ when he declared in a shameless manner: “By education, I am an Englishman, by views, an internationalist, by culture, a Muslim, and I am a Hindu only by accident of birth”. That is why posterity will damn him as MAULANA JAWAHARLAL NEHRU and not as Pandit Nehru!!!
In the convocation address of 1948, referred to above, Pandit Nehru had forcefully indicated that there was something wrong with the psyche of the people. Today, not one of his successors or followers in Sonia Congress Party would dare even remember what their own bellowed leader and icon Panditji had said in 1948. The nation has got into the irretrievable mire of anti-Hindu pseudo secularism.
Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit have asked the right questions: What was responsible for the entrenched ideology that not only disowned and distanced itself from the glorious past of India, but also distorted and denigrated it? Why have Indian heritage and history been consistently denied their rightful place in world history and even in books written by Indians and published in India? Why has the Indian contribution in the realm of philosophy, culture, legal system, universal brotherhood, medicine, polity, science and technology been denied? In this context I fully endorse the view of these two authors: “India’s contribution to various branches of knowledge and wisdom was denied in the past by the British as well as many Indian historians working under the British Raj and British influence. But why has this attitude not changed even after independence?
The two authors have rightly observed that the enslavement of the mind is, perhaps, the deadliest weapon in the world. With the introduction of Macaulay system of education in 1835 the enslavement of the Indian mind began and it continues to be so even today — even after 63 years of our partitioned independence.
The study of history is not a luxury. It is a necessity. Arthur Marwick (1936-2006), the historian, has been cited by these two authors. According to Marwick, as memory is to the individual, so history is to the community or the society. Without memory, people would lose their identity. A society without knowledge of its past would be like an individual with out memory. To quote the exact words of Marwick: ‘Without history (knowledge of the past), we, and our communities, would be utterly adrift on an endless and featureless sea of time.’
The British Colonial Government in India did everything necessary to obliterate and efface the memory of ancient India from the minds of our people. As long as the British ruled India, Indians felt totally helpless to stop the falsification of their history caused by the ruling cabal of English colonial evangelical rulers. Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit have pointed out that though laudable efforts were made by several great Indian historians and Indologists like Sir Jadunath Sarcar, R.C. Majumdar, R.K. Mukherjee, K.P Jaiswal, D.R Bhandarkar, K.A Neelakanta Sastri and others to present an objective history of India from the Indian point of view, yet their writings were kept outside the pale of officially recognised, trumpeted, pampered, patronised and lionised historians of British Raj.
From 1920’s to 1940’s, it was the widespread popular hope and expectation that with the attainment of our freedom, the injustice done to the past of India and its educational system by the British rulers would get automatically rectified in the same manner as it has been done in most countries that became free after a long period of foreign rule.
Alas! This has not happened in India! Even after our independence, the very same people who had helped the British in ruling the country and had opposed the freedom movement became partners in the decision-making process due to the favours extended to them by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. In this context I am referring to the Communists and the Marxists. The very same wicked Communists who had done everything in their might to subvert the Quit India Movement in 1942, had spied against all well-known Congress leaders, including Nehru himself, and had worked against efforts of Congress leaders to avert the partition of the country — the very same traitors — became the favourite toadies of the Nehru Congress Anti-Hindu Raj in post independent India.
‘Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit have rightly observed: “Consequently, even in free India, we have continued with not only the outdated British colonial education system, but also with a system that worked and is still working consistently against Indianness, the Indian psyche, the Indian ethos and, finally the Indian identity. Nothing can be moiré telling than when the President of this country requests —- once again in a Convocation Address — that the Macaulay system of education, which is still continuing even after 63 years of our independence, be changed. It may be mentioned in passing here that the Macaulay system of education came into force in 1835, exactly 170 years ago’.
The Colonial British Raj tried its best to obliterate the Glorious Hindu past of India. Even after independence Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, Narasimha Rao, A B Vajpayee and Dr Manmohan Singh have continued the same dastardly tradition. In this context I am reminded of how George Orwell envisioned a bleak society everywhere in the post Second World War world in which a people’s touchstones with the past would be systematically pulverized by a government as a matter of public policy. He wrote: ‘All history is a palimpsest, scraped clean and re-inscribed exactly as often as is necessary’. The motto of all these traitors is : WHO CONTROLS THE PAST CONTROLS THE FUTURE; WHO CONTROLS THE PRESENT CONTROLS THE PAST.
Wednesday, 11 November, 2009 , 02:33 PM
In these columns yesterday (Tuesday, 10 November, 2009), I wrote the second part of my review of the book titled ‘EDUCATING TO CONFUSE AND DISRUPT: Defiling History and Education System of India’, authored by two bold intellectual Kshatriyas namely, Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit who mercifully are not the usually ignorant, servile, spineless, pseudo-secular and anti-Hindu academic vermin sponsored by the government in power dressed in brief authority. Here I am referring to the endless procession of anti-Hindu, anti National, pro-Muslim, pro-Christian and virulently Marxist Historians produced by Pandit Maulana Jawaharlal Nehru University right from the early 1970’s.
|COVER PAGE OF BOOK
BY SRI DHARAMPAL (1922 – 2006)
The continuation of the British system of education and the deliberately distorted history of India produced by certain pseudo-secular scholars in the 1940’s and early 1950’s (which included Pandit Nehru himself!) totally favoured and helped the Communists/Marxists. The Communists fully endorsed the continuance of Macaulay system of education in free India. Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit are absolutely right in saying that for the known traitors of the CPI and CPI(M), free India was neither a sovereign country nor a sacred motherland for them. If it was any thing, it was a disgusting mass of Bourgeois Earth, to be converted into a Communist State as early as possible. Not only during the days of Quit India Movement 1942, but also during the time of Chinese invasion of India in 1962 and after, the Communists have acted as traitors. ONE SECTION OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY, WHICH CAME TO BE KNOWN AS CPI(M) AFTER THE COMMUNIST SPLIT IN 1963, DISPLAYED THE COMMUNIST BRAND OF DISRUPTIVE EXTRA-TERRITORIAL LOYALTY BY VIEWING INDIA AS AN AGGRESSOR AND MAO TSE TUNG’S COMMUNIST CHINA AS AN INNOCENT VICTIM OF UNPROVOKED INDIAN AGGRESSION. For this anti-National group, Indian democracy was a farce. It still remains a farce for them even today in the CPI(M) ruled States like West Bengal and Kerala where history and social science text books are full of anti-Hindu and anti-national communist propaganda.
The most important chapter in this very important book of Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit is Chapter 2 titled ‘Destruction of the beautiful Tree’. They begin this Chapter by quoting the prophetic words of Mahatma Gandhi which he spoke at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatam House, London on 20 October 1931:
“I say without fear of my figures being challenged successfully, that today India is more illiterate than it was fifty years or a hundred years ago, and so is Burma, because the British administrators, when they came to India, instead of taking hold of things as they were, began to root them out. They scratched the soil and began to look at the root, and left the root like that, and THE BEAUTIFUL TREE perished. The village schools were not good enough for the British administrator, so he came out with his programme. Every school must have so much paraphernalia, building, and so forth. Well, there were no such schools at all. There are statistics left by a British administrator which show that, in places where they have carried out a survey, ancient schools have gone by boards, because there was no recognition for these schools, and the schools established after the European pattern were too expensive for the people, and therefore, they could not possibly overtake the thing. I defy anybody to fulfill a programme of compulsory primary education of these masses inside of a century. This very poor country of mine is ill-able to sustain such an expensive method of education. Our State would revive the old village school master and dot every village a school both for boys and girls.”
The above grand dream of Mahatma Gandhi of reviving the old village school master in every village has been completely shattered by the Russia-embracing Communist vision of Pandit Jawharlal Nehru and his successors for 60 years after 1947. Any one can see that both the British East India Company which ruled India from 1757 to 1858 and later the British Colonial Government gave a deathblow to the traditional gurukula system of education in every village in India. After the British left, continuous blows have been dealt, to such remnants of the ancient system of education and culture that remained, by the Congress Governments of Nehru and his successors till date with one vital difference. The British colonial government never targeted the Hindu faith and religion after 1858. On the other hand all the Congress governments after our independence, wholly assisted by the Communists and the Marxists, have worked in a determined manner not only to destroy our traditional systems of education, but also to root out Hindu religion, Hindu culture, Hindu society and in short all vestiges of Sanatana Dharma. This assault has reached its peak today under the anti-Hindu and evangelical Italian colonial Government of India!
It is indeed amazing to see that the Father of our Nation, Mahatma Gandhi, could really present such a precise and exact view of the planned destruction of the traditional systems of education in India by the British Raj as early as in 1931. The only inference that we can draw is that he was very familiar with the reports of some of the British Civil Servants of Bengal, Bihar, Bombay and Madras Presidency on the native systems of education that prevailed in those parts of India in the first quarter of the 19th century. It was the great Gandhian scholar and historian Dharampal (1922 – 2006) who completely brought out the ground level truths about the indigenous Indian education in the 18th century in his path-breaking and monumental book titled ‘The Beautiful Tree’. In this work Dharampal has clearly explained how our age-old system of education was destroyed in a systematic manner by the English administrators of the East India Company from 1775 to 1857. The wailing cry of Mahatma Gandhi in London in 1931 against the destruction of ‘The Beautiful Tree’ of indigenous education by the British administrators of British Raj in the 19th century, was fully vindicated in a detailed and scientific manner with unassailable documentary and statistical evidence by Dharampal in his magnum opus ‘The Beautiful Tree’. (I have presented the front cover of this book above.) Dharampal has effectively debunked the myth that Dalits had no place in the indigenous system of education.
|Shri Dharampal (1922 – 2006)|
Besides this great work, he has also authored several books, including ‘Indian Science and Technology in the 18th Century’. I remember myself and my wife attending a public lecture in Madras in the late 1990’s when he spoke eloquently with solid facts and figures about India’s achievements in the fields of science and agriculture, the proven efficacy of indigenous systems of local governance in India and the deleterious effects of British bureaucratic rule.
After the lecture when we had a discussion with him about various aspects of British colonial rule, Dharampal told us that the British could never understand the eternal spirit of India. These were his words in this context: “What is great about India?…we need to understand this…the greatness of this country is that the ordinary people in this country have a certain understanding, that everything in nature is connected…and they have built their lives around this understanding…this is the greatness of this country”. Dharampal was of the view that it was a conscious policy of the British government in India to cut asunder this chain of time tested understanding among the masses of India derived from our ancient culture through the imposition of wrongly conceived, dogmatically and dictatorially implemented bureaucratic forms, programmes and policies of British Raj.
I am happy to note that Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit have rightly given the title of DESTRUCTION OF THE BEAUTIFUL TREE to Chapter 2 of their book. This chapter has been divided into 3 sections. In Section 1, they have dealt with in detail the system about which Mahatma Gandhi was talking about and admiring as The Beautiful Tree in 1931 and which was destroyed by the British. In Section 2, they have given a detailed account of the changing British education policy from the time of Governor General Warren Hastings from 1774 to 1785 and going up to the period of Governor General Amherst, who ruled from 1823 to 1828. According to these two authors, the pernicious educational policies pursued during this period of 54 years led to the complete enslavement of the minds, hearts and souls of the Indian people. In Section 3, they have taken a close look at the strategies adopted by the British to destroy the Indian education system.
Chapter 2 of the book deals with the past of British India of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. All of us are sacredly duty bound to look at this past and understand it in letter and spirit. If we choose to ignore the past, we run the risk of not only losing our control over the present, but also forfeiting our right to the future. In this context, we should derive our inspiration from the following engraving of inscriptions upon the neo-classical architecture of the National Archive in Washington DC: ‘What is Past is Prologue’; ‘Study the past’; ‘The glory and romance of our history are here preserved in the chronicles of those who conceived and builded the structure of our nation’; ‘The ties which bind the lives of our people in one indissoluble union are perpetuated in the archives of our Government and to their custody this building is dedicated’; ‘This building holds in trust the records of our national life and symbolizes our faith in the permanency of our national institutions’.
The most beneficial impact of the British Rule has been the establishment of Departments of National Archives in all parts of India. Based on a thorough study of these ancient and old records and documents, Dharampal has brought out all the bitter unknown truths of British Rule in the field of education. Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit have succeeded in furthering the work of Dharampal by showing how the process of destruction of education in free India has been more or less completed by the Congress and other “secular” anti-Hindu governments with great political zest and enthusiasm during the last 62 years after our independence.
Thursday, 12 November, 2009 , 03:27 PM
‘Truth will rise above falsehood as oil above water’ – Miguel De Cervantes (1547-1616). ‘And in the end, through the long ages of our quest for light, it will be found that truth is still mightier than the sword. From out of the welter of human carnage and human sorrow and human weal the indestructible thing that will always live is a sound idea’ – General Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964).
‘To all new truths, or renovation of old truths, it must be as in the ark between the destroyed and the about – to – be renovated world. The raven must be sent out before the dove, and ominous controversy must precede peace and the olive wreath’ – Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834).
In these columns yesterday (Wednesday, 11 November, 2009), I wrote the third part of my review of the multidisciplinary book titled ‘EDUCATING TO CONFUSE AND DISRUPT: Defiling History and Education System of India’, authored by two brilliant academics, humanists and ardent patriots, Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit. The title of their second chapter, ‘The Beautiful Tree’ has been derived from the title of an explosive book on indigenous education in India in the 18th century, written by Sri Dharampal (please see the cover page above) and how it was destroyed root and branch by the British colonial rulers in the 18th and 19th centuries. Dharampal himself in his preface has said that he has derived the title of ‘The Beautiful Tree’ for his book from the historic speech of Mahatma Gandhi delivered at Chatam House, London on October 20, 1931. Mahatma Gandhi had used this term to refer to the time honoured system of Gurukula education in India from times immemorial and how the British Government in India used its imperial might to destroy this ’Beautiful Tree’.
After explaining how the traditional Indian Gurukula educational system was derived from Varna-ashrama Dharma, Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit have described an outline form the four stages of life in ancient India — Brahmacharya, Grihastha, Vanaprastha and Sanyas. Of these, the first stage i.e, Brahmacharya was concerned with education. The education of the child began with the Upanayana Samskara (sacred-thread ceremony). This Upanayana Samskara did not merely mean the admission of a pupil in the register of a school on the payment of prescribed fees. With Upanayana a new phase was initiated into a child’s life. After this ceremony, the child was handed over to the Guru (the teacher) who accepted him as his pupil. The Guru was expected to keep the pupil in his close proximity and teach him all Shastras. This came to be metaphorically described as the Guru keeping the child in his ‘womb’, impregnating him with his spirit and delivering him in a new birth; a transformed, educated and civilized human being. It was this phenomenon that Satapatha Brahmana describes as becoming Dvija (born a second time), and it was not the reference to the Varna Brahmins, as is popularly misconceived and misunderstood today. The Taittriya Aranyaka lays down that a teacher must teach with all his heart and soul.
A teacher was anxious to ensure the sustenance and continuity of his school of thought, and pupils also travelled from distant places to learn a particular branch of knowledge from a particularly renowned Guru. This was the underlying basis of the Gurukula system of old. In ancient India the important branches of knowledge that attracted pupils in large numbers included different subjects such as literature, grammar, religion, philosophy, logic, polity, economics, mathematics, astronomy, astrology, medicine, surgery, accountancy, commerce, agriculture, music, dance, painting, architecture, sculpture and the like. What is important in this context is the fact that some of the centres of learning were more famous for one branch of learning than the others. For example, Takshashila University was famous as a great seat of learning for Economics, Poilty and Military Science; while Kashi was famous for Vedic Studies and Medicine. So, this great idea of one centre of learning specializing in one field and becoming famous everywhere did not come from the West!
Broadly speaking there evolved 4 different types of institutions for the spread of education and learning in ancient India. They were, A – Gurukulas (The homes of teachers as schools), B – Parishads (Academies), C – Goshthis (Conferences) and D – University Education. In ancient India there were no regular budgetary provisions for the financial support of education by the government and no funding agencies like the University Grants Commission / Commission for Higher Education / Commission for Primary Education etc. How then did these educational institutions and individual teachers survive? The answer lies in the fact that they received help from Kings, individuals and the society. Vidya-daana (giving of education) was pronounced to be the best of gifts, with higher religious sanctity than even Bhoomi-daana (the gift of land). Religion had a great hold on the minds of the people and this spiritual exaltation of Vidya-daana inspired a wide and warm response to the cause of education, both from the public and the government. It therefore became possible to impart free education to all the poor students who were eager to learn.
Governments used to help the cause of education in many indirect ways too. They offered scholarships to students to enable them to complete their education. Often, they sponsored literary debates and offered fabulous rewards to winning scholars. Vikramaditya and Harsha are well known for their patronage to learned men. In making various appointments they used to show preference to men of learning.
Today, a pernicious view seems to have emerged that schools and colleges can never be free from political (party all the time!) control as long as the State exists. All the states at present are anxious to control educational institutions and curriculum as soon as they give grants to them. In totalitarian states, education has become a means of propaganda for the dissemination of government’s views and policies. The states in ancient India, however, never attempted to control education, simply because it was liberally subsidizing it. There were no Directors of Public Instruction, Inspectors/ Deputy Inspectors of Schools to direct and control the educational policy and progress.
According to Dharampal such a decentralized system of indigenous education existed in India from the Himalayas to Kanyakumari and from the Rann of Kutch to the Bay of Bengal, till the end of the 18th century. Then gradually in a matter of less than 50 years, the British Government in India destroyed this ancient system.
Dharampal has pointed out that instructions regarding the collection of information about the extent and nature of indigenous Indian education and its contemporary state were largely the consequence of the long debate in the House of Commons in 1813 relating to the promotion of “Religious and Moral improvement” (Induced and forced fraudulent religious conversion to Christianity!!) in India. Before any new policy could be devised, the existing position on ground needed to be known. Thus the information which is available today, whether published or still in manuscript form in government records, about different parts of India largely belongs to the 1820s to 1840s.
Right from 1822 instructions were issued both by the Government of Madras and the Board of Revenue to the 21 District Collectors in Madras Presidency to collect data relating to village schools and sent to the Board of Revenue for onward transmission to the Government. All these reports relating to the period from 1822 to 1825 have been carefully studied, analysed and presented by Dharampal in a very incisive manner in his book. Sir Thomas Munroe (1761-1827), the Governor of Madras and Father of Ryotwari Settlement in Madras Presidency was responsible for ordering this pioneering and extensive survey. He reported after doing the survey that ‘every village in Madras Presidency had a school’.
13 years after the initiation of the survey in the Madras Presidency a more limited semi-official survey of indigenous education was taken up in the Presidency of Bengal. This was what is known as the celebrated William Adam’s Reports or to give the full title, Reports On The State Of Education In Bengal In 1836 And 1838. WILLIAM ADAMS REPORTED THAT THERE WERE 1,00,000 VILLAGE SCHOOLS IN BENGAL AND BIHAR TILL THE 1830’S.
In 1820, G L Prendergast, a Member of the Governor’s Council in Bombay reviewed the system of indigenous education in his jurisdiction and said: ‘There is hardly a village, great or small, through out our territories, in which there is not at least one school and in larger villages more’.
62 years later, Dr G W Leitner, former Principal of Government College, Lahore and Director of Public Instruction in the Punjab prepared an even more voluminous survey of indigenous education there. The survey is very similar to that of the report of William Adams in language and conclusions. His reports showed that at the time of British conquest of the Punjab in 1845, there were more than 3,30,000 pupils in the schools of different denominations in the Punjab. This number had declined to less than 1,90,000 in 1882 – within 37 years of British misrule in that province.
Dr G W Leitner himself wrote that till 1845 in these indigenous Sanskrit and Arabic schools, highest standards of instruction and education were maintained in the fields of Oriental Literature, systems of Oriental Law, Logic, Philosophy and Medicine.
In the light of all this analysis of available data, Dharampal has rightly concluded: ‘The common impression which emerges from the 1822-1825 Madras Presidency Data, the Reports of W Adam on Bengal and Bihar, 1835-1838, and the later Punjab Survey by Dr G.W Leitner is that of a wide-spread neglect and decay in the field of indigenous education within a few decades after the onset of British rule in India. … The 1769 – 70 famine in Bengal when according to official British records, one third of the population actually perished, may be taken as a mere forerunner of what was to come.’
Total socio-economic and cultural destruction of India was deliberately planned by the colonial British Government in India right from 1757. Karl Marx was a bigger political scoundrel than the Marxists / Communists of India today. This will be clear from what he wrote in 1853: ‘England has to fulfill a double mission in India: one destructive, the other regenerating — the annihilation of the old Asiatic society, and the laying of the material foundation of Western Society in India’. This is what the Communist Governments in Kerala and West Bengal are attempting to achieve in the shortest possible time!!
With great sorrow and inner anguish, the dark and tragic story of total destruction of ancient Gurukula system of education in India has to be told in more graphic detail.
Friday, 13 November, 2009 , 03:34 PM
In these columns yesterday (Thursday, 12 November, 2009), I wrote the fourth part of my review of the multidisciplinary book titled ‘EDUCATING TO CONFUSE AND DISRUPT: Defiling History and Education System of India’, authored by Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit. These two authors have drawn heavily upon the pioneering work of Dharampal relating to the fully documented colonial British destruction of the Indian indigenous Gurukula system of education in the 18th and 19th centuries. I had dealt with Dharampal’s analysis in detail yesterday. We can see from his book that India was far ahead of England in the field of school education up to the end of 18th century and also up to 1825. William Adam in his Report of 1835 had stated that 100,000 village schools existed in Bengal and Bihar in 1830.
In Madras Presidency in 1823 during the time of Governor Sir Thomas Munroe, there were 11,575 village schools with 157,195 students and 1,094 colleges with 5,434 students. The population of Madras Presidency at that time was 10.28 Million. England had very much fewer schools for the children of the common people at that time. Around the same time less than 10,000 schools existed in all of England. The population of England at that time was around the same time was 9.8 Million.
We have noted that the population of Madras Presidency in 1823 was 10.28 Million. Exactly 51 years later, the population of Madras Presidency had tripled reaching a level of 31.30 Million. By that time the supercilious and super-incumbent Office of Director of Public Instruction (DPI) and State promoted institutions had replaced all the traditional village schools in Madras Presidency. The DPI Report for the year 1879-1880 stated that the total number of all educational institutions (primary schools, secondary schools, colleges and all special educational institutions) was 10,553. Out of this, primary schools numbered 10,106. The total number of students in the British directed colonial system of education (mainly to produce a few clerks and a large number of half-baked slaves!!!) had been brought down to 2,38,960 students. Even a cursory perusal of these official figures will show how education declined in Madras Presidency during the period from 1823 to 1880.
Dharampal has brought out the fact that the same position prevailed in Bombay Presidency. More than 15,000 traditional village schools went out of existence in Bombay Presidency during the period from 1820 to 1885. G.L Prendergast, a Member of the Governor’s Council in Bombay Presidency, recorded the following Minute in April 1821: “I need hardly mention what every member of the Governor’s Council knows as well as I do, that there is hardly a village, great or small, throughout our territories, in which there is not at least one school, and in larger villages, more; many in every town, and in large cities in every division; where young natives are taught reading, writing and arithmetic, upon a system so economical, from a handful or two of grain, to perhaps a Rupee per month to the school master, according to the ability of the parents, and at the same time so simple and effectual, that there is hardly a cultivator or petty dealer who is not competent to keep his own accounts with a degree of accuracy, in my opinion, beyond what we meet with amongst the more splendid dealers and bankers keep their books with a degree of ease, conciseness and clearness I rather think fully equal to those of any British merchants.”
Sir Thomas Manrou , the Governor of Madras, gave the same assesment has that of G.L Prendergast in Bombay, in respect of more than 10,000 traditional Village Schools in madras presidency in 1825.
IN THE LIGHT OF ALL THIS ANALYSIS DHARAMPAL HAS COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ANCIENT INDIAN SYSTEM OF GURUKULA EDUCATION COLLAPSED TOTALLY DURING THE BRITISH COLONIAL PERIOD FROM 1780 TO 1850.
Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit have stated in Chapter 2 of their book that the involvement of the British in the Indian education system began with Warren Hastings, the first Governor General of British India from 1773 to 1785. Hastings was sympathetic to the Indian culture and civilization. He extended his full assistance to Sir William Jones who established the Asiatic Society of Bengal at Calcutta in January 1784. Hastings was deeply involved in promoting various scholarly enterprises, including those of translating Sanskrit and Persian literature into English. He was also instrumental in founding the Calcutta Madarsa in 1781 and persuading his London authorities to grant a permanent endowment of the revenue of a few villages to meet it’s expenditure in this regard.
It was Hastings who was responsible for directing Charles Wilkins (1749-1836) to translate the Bhagawat Gita into English which was published in London in 1785 under the title ‘Bhagvat-geeta, or Dialogues of Kreeshna and Arjoon (London: Nourse, 1785)’. Warren Hastings wrote a very perceptive and prophetic foreword to this work in which he observed: “The writers of the Indian philosophies will survive, when the British dominion in India shall long have ceased to exist, and when the sources which it yielded of wealth and power are lost to remembrances.”
In 1792, due to the efforts of Jonathan Duncan, the Banaras Sanskrit College was established during the period of Lord Cornwallis. While making his proposal for the establishment of this college, Duncan cited two vital reasons, A – “The natives will understand that this college will be run by themselves without being participated by British subjects, who are to Rule over them”. B – “By preserving and disseminating a knowledge of the Hindoo Law, and proving a Nursery of future Doctors and Expounders thereof to assist the European Judges in the due regular, and uniform administration to its genuine Letter and Spirit to the Body of the people”.
Thus Warren Hastings’s policy of promotion of Oriental Learning through Sanskrit, Persian and Arabic was also maintained by Lord Wellesley who founded the Fort William College in 1800. Though its students were European boys and its aim was to train the newly recruited East India Company officials, the College was steeped in the traditional Indian perspective that Warren Hastings and others had helped foster. Great Oriental scholars like H. T Colebrooke and H.H Wilson served there, along with Indian scholars of Sanskrit and Persian.
The British policy of promotion of traditional learning received a setback in 1813 when the Charter Act of 1813 was passed. This Act for the first time made it possible for the British Christian missionaries to operate freely in India to pursue their proselytization policies in India. By this time missionaries, traders and utilitarian’s, had started opposing the continuance of traditional system of education in India and were making out a strong case for the spread of English language and Christianity in India.
The man who had prepared the ground for the Christian conversion of India was a man called Charles Grant who served in the East India Company from 1768 to 1790. He had consistently opposed the pro-Oriental learning policies of Warren Hastings, Lord Cornwallis and Lord Wellesley. James Mill who was working in the London Office of the East India Company also played a part along with Charles Grant for bringing about this change of attitude of the East India Company.
The evangelical pressure from this imperious English Man got further strengthened by people like Raja Ram Mohan Roy (1777-1833) in Bengal. He was born in a wealthy Brahmin family. He studied Sanskrit, Persian, Greek and Italian. He came under the influence of Christianity and Islam. He foolishly advocated the introduction of Monotheism in Hinduism and founded the Brahmo Samaj. When Lord Amherst Governor General of India from 1823 to 1828, established the Calcutta Sanskrit College, Raja Ram Mohan Roy strongly opposed it. He wrote to Lord Amherst on 11 July, 1823 that the teaching of Sanskrit was the best way to keep Indian in the dark and in ignorance of real knowledge. He was a firm believer in the proselytization programmes of men like Charles Grant, Wilberforce and James Mill which later came to be articulated and more forcefully expressed in the famous Minutes of THOMAS BOBBINGTON MACAULAY (1800-1859) in 1835.
Lord Amherst was able to overrule the views of anti-Sanskrit people like James Mill and Raja Ram Mohan Roy because of the dominant role played by two great British Orientalists, like H.H Wilson and James Prinsep in the General Committee for Public Instruction (GCPI). This Committee categorically noted in 1826 that Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s views on Sanskrit learning were not representative of Hindu opinion at that time, but were the thoughts “of one individual alone, whose opinions are well known to be hostile to those entertained by almost all his countrymen”.
Thus what becomes clear from the contemporary documents is that Raja Ram Mohan Roy was not really a reformer of Hindu society as has been propagated mischievously by the British and Marxists historians, but a spokesperson of Charles Grant, James Mill, Wilberforce and Lord Macaulay.
The collapse of Sanskrit-based Oriental learning began with the departure of H.H Wilson to take up Sanskrit professorship at Oxford in 1833 and the appointment of Charles E. Trevelyan (who later became the Brother-in-Law of Lord Macaulay) to the General Committee for Public Instructions (GCPI) in Calcutta. Lord William Bentinck was the Governor General at that time. Lord Macaulay came to join his Council in 1834. These three political ‘evangelists’ conspired together to give a death blow to the Gurukula system of education in India. The cheap, petty and criminally egoistic role played by Lord Macaulay in this conspiracy to destroy the soul of the age-old system of Indian education will be the subject matter of tomorrow’s article.
Tuesday, 17 November, 2009 , 03:46 PM
In these columns on Friday, 13 November, 2009, I wrote the fifth part of my review of the multidisciplinary book authored by Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit titled ‘EDUCATING TO CONFUSE AND DISRUPT: Defiling History and Education System of India’.
In Chapter 2 of this book, these authors have described in detail as to how the introduction of Macaulay system of English education introduced in 1835 laid a solid foundation for the destruction of the ancient Gurukula system of education, Hindu religion, Hindu culture, Hindu society and Sanatana Dharma.
|LORD WILLIAM BENTINCK (1774-1839)|
Lord Macaulay arrived in India in 1834 and took up the post of the Legal Member in the Governor General’s Council in Calcutta. Lord William Bentinck (1774-1839) was the Governor General of India at that time. Even before coming to India Macaulay’s anti-Hindu and anti-Indian views on education policy were well-known. He drafted his famous Minutes on Education Policy on 2 February 1835 and 7 March 1835. Lord Bentinck put his seal of approval on the Minutes of Macaulay on 7 March 1835.
What really emerges from the official and known records is that Macaulay, Lord Bentinck and Sir Charles Trevelyan (1807-1886) plotted together to defeat the strong case made out for the continuance of Oriental system of education in India which was strongly recommended by Orientalists like H.H Wilson, J.C.C Southerland, J.T Princep and, James Princep of the Brahmi script decipherment fame. These Orientalists were all members of the General Committee of Public Instruction (GCPI). Macaulay carried the day along with Charles Trevelyan, who was his brother-in-law. There is also clear documentary evidence to prove that Macaulay had written to his sister in December 1834 itself mentioning that Lord Bentinck had given his informal consent in favour of Christian missionaries in India and Macaulay’s English-oriented approach to the policy on Indian Education.
According to Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit, in order to discontinue the teaching of Sanskrit and also to dismantle and discard the entire prevailing education system, Macaulay resorted to the most absurd logic and launched a blistering attack on the opposition by the Orientalists. To quote Macaulay’s words: ‘As it seems to be the opinion of some of the Gentlemen who compose the General Committee of Public Instruction (GCPI) that the course which they have hitherto pursued was strictly prescribed by the British Parliament in 1813 … it is argued, or rather taken for granted, that by literature the Parliament can have meant only Arabic and Sanskrit literature; that they never would have given the Honourable appellation of a ‘learned native’ to a native who was familiar with the poetry of Milton, the metaphysics of Locke, and with the physics of Newton; but that they meant to designate by that name only such persons as might have studied in the sacred books of the Hindoos all the uses of Cusa-Grass, and all the mysteries of absorption into Deity … This does not appear to be a satisfactory interpretation … if the Government has given to any person a formal assurance — nay, if the Government has excited in any person (‘s) mind a reasonable expectation, — that he shall receive a certain income as a teacher of a learner of Sanskrit or Arabic, I would respect that person’s Pecuniary interests … But to talk of a Government pledging itself to teach certain languages and certain sciences, though those languages may become useless, though those languages may be exploded, seems to me quite unmeani’.
In order to understand the above Minutes of Macaulay, it is necessary to look at the Charter Act of 1813 passed by the British Parliament that Macaulay is referring to above. The relevant portion (Clause XLIII) of the East Indian Company Charter Act of 1813 says: “And be it further enacted … after defraying the expenses of the military, civil, and commercial establishments, and paying the interests of debt, in manner herein-after provided, a sum of not less than one Lakh of Rupees in each year shall be set apart and applied to the revival and improvement of literature and encouragement of the learned natives of India, and for the introduction and promotion of a knowledge of the sciences among the inhabitants of the British territories in India.
It is a well-documented fact that the above quoted Clause XLIII above was incorporated duly in the 1813 Charter Act of the Company largely because of Lord Minto’s views favoring the ‘revival’ of literature and traditional Indian learning as set out in his well-known Minutes of 6 March 1811. We can see from Macaulay’s mean, mendacious, malicious and mischievous Minutes above that he not only re-interpreted the 1813 Act absurdly but also imputed pecuniary motives to those distinguished Orientalists who were opposing Macaulay’s evangelical, colonial and racist designs against the traditional Indian educational system.
Macaulay himself admitted (rarest of the rare admission indeed!!!) that he had no knowledge of either Sanskrit or Arabic languages. And yet, despite this admission, we cannot fail to see the overweening racial arrogance oozing out of the following foolish Minutes of Macaulay: ‘I have no knowledge of either Sanskrit or Arabic. But I have done what I could to form a correct estimate of their value. I have read translations of the most celebrated Arabic and Sanskrit works. I have conversed, both here and at home, with men distinguished by their proficiency in the Eastern tongues. I am quite ready to take the Oriental learning at the valuation of the Orientalists themselves. I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabic (he meant Arabia). The intrinsic superiority of the Western literature is indeed fully admitted by those Members of the General Committee for Public Instruction (GCPI) who support the Oriental plan of education. … It is, I believe, no exaggeration to say all the historical information which has been collected from all the books written in Sanskrit language is less valuable than what may be found in the most paltry abridgements used at preparatory schools in England’.
Macaulay savagely attacked the Sanskrit language and Gurukula system of education when he wrote the following Minutes: ‘It is confessed that a language is barren of useful knowledge. We are to teach it because it is fruitful of monstrous superstitions. WE ARE TO TEACH FALSE HISTORY, FALSE ASTRONOMY, FALSE MEDICINE, BECAUSE WE FIND THEM IN COMPANY OF A FALSE RELIGION’.
After saying all this, Macaulay made out the following case for the immediate introduction of English as a medium of education in India. “We have to educate a people, who cannot at present be educated by means of their own mother-tongue. We must teach them some foreign language. The claims of our language it is hardly necessary to recapitulate. It stands pre-eminent even among the languages of the West. It abounds with the works of imagination not inferior to the noblest which Greece has bequeathed to us … whoever knows that language has ready access to all the vast intellectual wealth which all the wisest nations of the earth have created and hoarded in the course of the generations. It may safely be said that the literature now extant in that language, is of a greater value than all the literature which three hundred years ago was extant in all the languages of the world together. Nor is this all. In India, English is the language spoken by the ruling class … whether we look at the intrinsic value of our literature, or at the particular situation of the country, we shall see the strongest reason to think that, of all foreign tongues, the English tongue is that which would be the most useful to our native subjects.”
When I re-read the above foolish Minutes of Macaulay, I cannot help observing that he seems to take special delight in declaring thus: ‘I won’t be satisfied if you are already aware of my Himalayan imperial colonial ignorance and Christian superciliousness stemming from my racial arrogance. My White English Christian soul shall rest in peace, only if I can get on top of a public podium and proclaim with imperial authority the boundless extent, altitude, magnitude, and volume of my colossal British colonial ignorance of ancient India and her deathless culture.’
Finally, the real colonial intention of the policy of permanent mental enslavement of the natives of India was declared by Lord Macaulay at the end of his famous Minutes cited above: ‘We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions we govern — A CLASS OF PERSONS INDIAN IN BLOOD AND COLOUR, BUT ENGLISH IN TASTES, IN OPINIONS, IN MORALS AND IN INTELLECT’.
And the rest is history. Professor Makkhan Lal and Professor Rajendra Dixit have rightly concluded that in FREE INDIA TODAY, WE ARE MORE BURDENED WITH MACAULAYISM THAN IN BRITISH INDIA. The ‘Class’ created by Macaulay for British colonial purposes in 1835 continues to remain firmly entrenched in the India of today and continues to be the ‘Interpreter’ between the Indian masses and the new political bosses. Our decadent and colonial educational system even today continues to produce only ‘Interpreters’ who are “a class of persons Indian in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals and intellect”.
To conclude today’s story, during the past six centuries the most belligerent, the most rapacious, the most power-drunk section of humanity has been precisely the Christian Western world. Its armies followed by its priests and merchants … its peculiar brand of “Christian Love” has generally manifested itself in pitiless extermination, enslavement, coercion, destruction of traditional cultures and their values … and the spread of alcoholism and venereal diseases and mercenary ruthlessness and the like.
(continued in part II)