Sunder-ji
From all that I have seen over the last few years the worldwide commies are being co-opted by the US establishment as the 'left'. There is no reason to believe that Pres Bush is actually upset at any of the effigy-burning etc.. Infact I wouldnt be surprised if the consulate itself arranged for some of these demonstrations. At the very least the USG understands desi politics and will play all kinds of people against each other to get what it wants. The naive and the scum just happily join the bandwagon to diss Matrubhoomi every chance they get.
Madhulika-ji
Those guys are actually pretty cute.. Farmer more looked like..
<img src='http://www.rockymountainministries.org/NewFiles/ScaredCat.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.indiawest.com/view.php?subaction=showfull&id=1141321805&archive=&star\
t_from=&ucat=1&
Panel Accepts Some Textbook Edits After Compromise
By ASHFAQUE SWAPAN
Special to India-West
SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Following an impassioned, emotionally charged meeting here
Feb. 27 at the California Department of Education, where hundreds of Indian
Americans presented their views in front of a Board of Education subcommittee,
the five-member panel unanimously voted to recommend adoption of staff
recommendations for edits and corrections proposed by the Hindu Education
Foundation and Austin, Texas-based Vedic Foundation for its sixth-grade
textbooks.
The staff recommendations reflect a compromise on a substantial part of the
proposed edits following a meeting Jan. 6 between Harvard Sanskrit expert and
philologist Prof. Michael Witzel and Cal State Northridge emeritus Prof. Shiva
Bajpai; on issues where they couldn't agree, the edits were rejected in favor of
the original text.
The compromise appears to have worked in some measure: Groups that have been
bitterly arguing on the issue have all expressed satisfaction, albeit qualified,
at the acceptance of the staff recommendations.
Although quite a few disgruntled HEF supporters appeared irate following the
announcement at the end of an over three-hour-long session of public comments,
several crying "Shame!" HEF organizers told India-West they were pleased that 70
percent of their changes had been accepted.
"On behalf of the Hindu community, we have done significant progress to correct
the biases and distortions in the textbooks," HEF spokesperson Khanderao Kand
told India-West. "We need to work further. There are gross inaccuracies."
Some of the recommendations in the list are inconsistent, haphazard and leave
factual errors intact, he added.
He added that HEF will continue to participate in other meetings. "Definitely we
will participate, and we will definitely present our case again and again (for
the panel) to reflect; hopefully they will realize there are some inaccuracies."
Meanwhile, Friends of South Asia, an activist group that has opposed the HEF and
VF campaign, welcomed the decision as well. "This decision is a victory for
community organizations such as Friends of South Asia, the Ambedkar Center for
Peace and Justice, the Federation of Tamils on North America, and the Coalition
Against Communalism, who have worked diligently to ensure that ahistorical and
sectarian content proposed by Hindu right-wing groups is removed from California
textbooks."
Raka Ray, a professor of sociology at the University of California at Berkeley
and chair of the university's Center for South Asia Studies, who spoke on behalf
of a number of South Asia scholars opposed to the HEF campaign, also welcomed
the recommendations.
"I think that it's crystal clear that all or the most pernicious material is
gone," she told India-West.
The public meeting Feb. 27 at the California Department of Education drew an
overflow audience of mostly Indian American supporters and opponents of HEF,
well over a few hundred, including anguished parents, activists, and a slew of
university faculty South Asia experts who were virtually unanimously critical of
the HEF campaign. They were joined by several dalit immigrants who made an
emotional appeal to reject what they saw as an HEF attempt to deny the history
of dalit oppression (I-W, Feb. 10).
HEF supporters, who came from as far as Orange County and San Fernando Valley,
included parents who spoke about how children went through traumatic experiences
at school due to negative portrayal of Hinduism and Indian history; individuals
who questioned whether it was appropriate to provide sixth-grade students with a
negative and in their view inaccurate idea of Hindus and Indian history; some
questioned why Hinduism was singled out for negative portrayal when other
religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam were treated with more
sensitivity. One HEF supporter said if dalits were so oppressed, how come they
had come to the U.S.?
HEF critics included university faculty, many of Indian descent, who questioned
the claim of HEF to represent all Hindus; several speakers who were raised in
the U.S. acknowledged that it was difficult for them as Hindus to learn about
past history of oppression but passionately defended teaching factual history,
warts and all, for a proper appreciation of historical and social reality.
Critics dismissed the HEF campaign as one driven by the sectarian agenda of the
Sangh Parivar, a term commonly used to describe the Hindu nationalist
triumvirate of India's Bharatiya Janata Party, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh
and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. (The HEF is affiliated with the Hindu Swayamsevak
Sangh, a sister organization of the RSS.)
Ruth Green, a member of the panel who conducted the meeting, was diplomatic but
firm. "I appreciate the diversity of opinion," she told the audience. However,
she stressed that what the panel took into consideration was the difference in
scholarly opinion.
South Asia scholars present at the meeting, though, were uniformly opposed to
the HEF campaign, and HEF critics say this is true for academia in the U.S. In a
letter to the Board of Education, Vinay Lal, a history professor at the
University of California at Los Angeles, wrote: "As far as I am aware, the Hindu
Education Foundation and Vedic Foundation and their supporters do not number
among their ranks any academic specialists in Indian history or religion other
than Professor Bajpai himself. It is a remarkable fact that, in a state which
has perhaps the leading public research university system in the United States,
these two foundations could not find a single professor of Indian history or
religion within the UC system (with its ten campuses) to support their views.
Indeed, it would be no exaggeration to say that they would be hard pressed to
find a single scholar at any research university in the United States who would
support their views."
HEF, on the other hand, is "unhappy about process violations and a suppression
of a pending list of changes from Vedic Foundation," it said in a press release.
"A better approach to deal with the issues related to Hinduism would have been
to form an independent committee of recognized Hindu scholars representing the
faith."
It particularly questioned the appointment of Witzel on an expert panel to make
recommendations. It was a letter from HEF critic Witzel, supported by over 40
South Asian experts, that caused the state board to revisit an earlier decision
to accept the bulk of HEF recommendations. "It's like appointing the accuser as
the prosecutor, judge and jury," HEF's Kand told India-West.
In its press release, HEF also said that "the subcommittee responded in a very
farcical manner to this lengthy debate. After the public hearing, without any
deliberations, within a few minutes, the subcommittee confirmed all the staff
recommendations."
Witzel, however, said that the issue was one of historical accuracy.
"Rationality has triumphed," he told India-West. "All the ahistorical
foundations of the two foundations have been taken out. Historical accuracy has
prevailed over mythological ideas of history."
He pointed to several areas of concern: The position of women, the caste system,
the political conditions of dalits, god with a capital G, the question of
monotheism and polytheism, and the issue of Aryan migration.
"If you would really go around the world, not just the country, and see what
scholars think, then they would strongly come down on the unequal position of
men and women, also other cultures, by the way-a description of Rome, almost
word by word, (in a textbook) is very similar to India."
On the Aryan migration theory, a bitter bone of contention between HEF
supporters and critics, the staff recommendations appear to walk a middle path.
While it refused to concur with the outright rejection of the theory by HEF
supporters, it leaves references to Aryan arrival somewhat vague.
For example, HEF had suggested substituting the following text: "In the years
that followed, a group of people called the Aryans began settling in the region.
Soon a new civilization emerged."
It suggested the following text: "In the years that followed, a group of people
called the Aryans from other regions in India began settling in the region,
enriching the Harappan civilization."
The staff accepted the HEF edit, but removed "in India" from the revised text.
UC Berkeley's Raka Ray said she understood "the concern the parents naturally
have when your child is minority, about the child being made fun of. I have
considerable sympathy for that position. I just think that historical accuracy
ultimately has to count for more."
The State Board of Education is slated to make its final decisions regarding the
textbook adoption at its meeting on March 8-10.
The panel considered 126 pages of edits and corrections, nine proposed textbook
submissions, and between 1,500-2,000 pages of letters and e-mails, Glee Johnson,
president of the State Board of Education, told India-West. The debate on Indian
history was a part of these deliberations. "Religious neutrality, historical
accuracy, and that represents the plurality of interests that have come to the
table" were the guiding principles for the panel, she added.
The complete PDF document listing the HEF edits and staff recommendations is
available at this Web link (HEF and VF discussion begins on Page 93)
http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/ag/ag/documents/h...ice022706a1.pdf.
More information is available at the following Web sites: Hindu Education
Foundation ( www.hindueducation.org), Friends of South Asia
( www.friendsofsouthasia.org),
South Asia Faculty Network ( http://southasiafaculty.net).
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pioneer
7March2006
<b>Sunset in Sacramento</b>
Sandhya Jain
The apparently acceptable Indo-US nuclear deal may have caused satisfaction to South Block and the State Department, but Americas Hindu community is feeling psychologically beleaguered as old Hindu-baiters from both countries gang up to abort a necessary correction of school textbooks in California. As the issue has a bearing on the self-esteem of Hindu Americans, besides relating to the integrity of Hindu civilization and its correct depiction, I am surprised that the BJP, which initiated the tilt towards Washington and also undertook the revision of history textbooks while in power, did not so much as whisper its concern to the visiting President Bush.
Neither Prime Minister Manmohan Singh nor UPA supremo Sonia Gandhi can be expected to be sympathetic to Hindu concerns in either country. Ms. Gandhi has overseen the placement of old party favourites in educational and cultural institutions and the restitution of a rendering of Indian history that fails to instill national pride in the student. We are thus faced with the old colonial reconstruction of Indian history, which diminishes the fabulous achievements of Hindu civilization and the unity of its social constituents, and deconstructs it into a disparate mosaic whose different components do not amount to a cultural coherence.
Americas Hindu community has long borne the burden of a humiliating and incorrect depiction of Hindu religion and culture; parents have faced young children saying they are ashamed to be Hindus. This motivated parents in Fairfax County to seek removal of distorted passages in textbooks, and California Hindus followed suit when the due process for revision of textbooks began last year.
Unfortunately, unlike Islam and Judaism, Americas Hindus lack political clout. Hence they were hopelessly out-manoeuvred by professional Hindu-haters led by Prof. Michael Witzel of the Harvard Sanskrit Department. As Harvard University ignored protests that Herr Witzel was misusing the varsity letterhead to pursue a political agenda, Hindus should settle scores by forcing closure of the Sanskrit Department by ensuring that the professor gets no students for two successive terms. Hindus should also reconsider support to Senators like Bobby Jindal, who have renounced and denounced the faith in which they were born in order to pursue political ambitions, but are insensitive to the concerns of those who elect them. Indian-origin fundraisers for any politician should also be made to understand that they cannot get something for nothing.
Like Jews and Muslims, Hindus only wanted the textbooks to portray their religion and history fairly and accurately. They diligently followed the due process and got several changes approved in this manner. Sadly, the California school board allowed this process to be hijacked by Herr Witzel, who claimed to be a religious scholar, though he is a non-Hindu, a known Hindu-baiter, and proponent of the discredited Aryan Invasion Theory. The Witzel intervention was both illegal and untenable, and could not have been possible without backroom manipulation of the state board of education (SBE); Hindus owe it to future generations to bring out the truth through a good courtroom battle.
The California SBE gave undue advantage to Herr Witzel when it should not have entertained him at all, especially after he said he was acting on an anonymous complaint from a non-existent Arun Vajpayee. Yet Witzel and his collaborator Steve Farmer immediately launched a high-decibel political campaign against the Hindu communitys proposed corrections, claiming these were motivated by Hindu nationalism (whatever that means) and getting bodies like the Federation of Indian Leftists (FOIL) to enter the fray. They alleged that American Hindu families seeking textbook revisions had links with the post-Godhra Gujarat mobs!
It is unforgivable that the school board deferred to such a shocking defamation of the Hindu American community in California, and a good attorney should be hired for a class action suit. Even more astonishing is the fact that the SBE set up a curriculum review panel (CRP) comprising Witzel, Stanley Wolpert (who signed Witzels appeal to SBE so much for objectivity), and a hired Prof. James Heitzman. This CRP rejected 58 changes approved by CBE-appointed expert Prof. Shiva Bajpai, and labeled him a Hindutva apologist; Hindu Americans learnt of the existence of the CRP much later. It is significant that the changes sought by other religious groups were accepted in toto, without being subjected to other-community review and endorsement, and this reflects a religio-cultural bias against Hindus which the dominant Christian monotheists of America need to admit.
Worse, the defamation and untruths do not end here. Last December, a Kansas University Professor of Religious Studies, Paul Mirecki, who enraged Christian bigots by lampooning the Biblical version of Creation, was beaten up; he told police that the men who beat him made references to his controversial statements in this regard. Yet in an article in a leading magazine in India, Witzel and Romila Thapar concealed the truth and insinuated that the professor was beaten by so-called Hindu fundamentalists. They further alleged that death threats were made to some of their gang.
Yet Witzel and Thapar erode their already dubious academic credibility by claiming that NASA and ISRO satellite imagery of ancient riverbeds along the famed route of the Saraswati do not prove the existence of the river in Vedic times. More embarrassingly for the California board, they admit the textbooks contain many passages that are very culturally biased and insensitive. Indeed, they assert that the authors of the impugned textbooks lack the knowledge and qualifications for the task, and suggest dumping both textbooks and authors and hiring so-called international scholars from The Academic Indology Advisory Council¸ which they have set up with fellow travellers. Surely the next step will be political lobbying on Capitol Hill to ensure that these self-accredited anti-Hindu academics become the sole contractors for writing Hindu religion and history! Witzel-Thapar want to launch an academic license-permit raj in the Free World, to teach the erstwhile natives their place.
In the circumstances, the Hindu Education Foundation (HEF) has done well to continue the struggle. Besides violating due process, the SBE failed to consider over 300 errors identified by the Vedic Foundation (VF). Alleging bias, VF plans to pursue matters with an independent panel of specialist Hindu scholars within US academia. It points out that the interpretation of Hindu dharma in the impugned books is at variance with the way Hindus understand and practice their faith, a fact which cannot be treated lightly.
Why, for instance, should devout Hindus accept that their children be taught that Hindus worship talking monkeys and throw widows into fires. Why should the primordial stories in Hindu scriptures be branded as myths when the scriptures of monotheistic traditions are said to come from Only One (mutually exclusive) God(s)? Most dishonest is the politically motivated attempt to project social evils like untouchability and rigid caste divisions upon Indias ancient civilization, when both are products of the medieval encounter with Islam. Is there a link between these biases and the US administrations current interest in women and Dalit (mostly Christian converts) rights?
Despite protests, the California SBE genuflected before antagonistic scholars. Hindus in India and America would do well to ponder why Islamic countries consistently stay aloof from the writing of Hindu or Indian history, including that of the medieval period, and all intellectual colonialism, whether of the capitalist or communist variety, has back-linkages with the West.
EOM
03-08-2006, 12:17 AM
(This post was last modified: 03-08-2006, 12:29 AM by agnivayu.)
Dr. Michael Witzel,
You racist pig b@st@rd, we shall see who has the last laugh.
Could it be that India's HINDU mathematical tradition is responsible for the growth of the technology industry there ?
These Pigs are so racist, they underestimate our capabilities... that is a very good thing.
<!--QuoteBegin-utepian+Mar 2 2006, 09:55 PM-->QUOTE(utepian @ Mar 2 2006, 09:55 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->From: Michael Witzel <witzel@...>
Date: Thu Mar 2, 2006Â 3:17 pm
Subject: Hindutva announces CA victory witzel_michael
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Though it is not yet the weekend, some amusing news about the CA
textbook story:
(1)
It took two days for the Hindutvavadins of CA and beyond to find out
that they actually have *won*Â Â the vote of the CA Board of Education's
committee on Monday (which voted 5: zero *against* the Hindutva edits).
How the Hindutvavadins have actually calculated their victory remains
a mystery, at least to the non-initiated. According to commonly used
math, 5Â is 5 more than zero.
<b>They must have used "Vedic mathematics" that were invented by (sorry,
"revealed" to)Â a recent Shankaracharya (a sort of pope of Hinduism).</b>
Vedic math was then introduced in school curricula by the
nationalists in the State of Uttar Prasdesh in the early Nineties. To
be followed by Astrology courses in universities, nationwide, in the
late Nineties/early 2000.
See what we are up to in CA and elsewhere if these groups persist?
Below follows the victory bulletin of the Hindu Press International, a
Hawai'an outfit out of Kauai, whose orange clad Caucasian editor had
flown in from mid-Pacific, all the way to CA, to participate in the
irregular Dec. 2 meeting. Now he has even moved to Davis, CA. Just
like another favorite of ours, Vishal Agawal, who has fled cold MN for
hot Rosemont, CA, to continue his hate mongering blogging from there
(actually, out of his company, Medtronics, as was shown just now on
another list,  ipactruth@..., Feb. 28). VA has composed some of
the most vituperative and libelous blogs about the CA process. He has
also given an "eye witness account" (speak: attack against anybody who
does not agree with Hindutva, from Committee members to individual
speakers: you know: "communists" etc. etc.) This is at India
Civilization Yahoo list, # 86614. (To follow, along with others, this
weekend).
The HIP victory cries include "75% of Hindu edits approved". Sure, if
you count all the 10 or so cases where Bajpai and I agreed on Jan. 6
to change "gods and goddesses" to "deities," and similarly crucial
edits :-)
But not, where really counts: the position of women, the caste system
and Dalits, Hindu "monotheism", and well, yes, even the CA state
mandated "Aryan Invasion" ...
See below.
(2)
Unfortunately, this religious news bulletin is in stark contrast to the
despair of the Hindu American Foundation (a "humanitarian" organization
whose President has lauded the worst excesses of the Hindu right; his
effusion still is on their party's own website, the BJP).
The HAF openly declares defeat.
See next message, with an --as always-- confused intro by our
beloved Dr .K.
The HAF cleverly uses this defeat for fundraising.
No Vedic math involved here, but instead the one used in
"pseudo-secular" capitalism...
But then, even the $ bill says:Â "in GOD we trust"Â -- as if straight
out of the Hindutva edits...
Maybe *that* is what they were really after?
Cheers, MW
[right][snapback]47573[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A must read..
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivili...n/message/87008
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Contrary to pompous claims being made by Professor Witzel, it is his
side that has been 'defeated'.
The board passed the final motion today to accept the document recommended for approval on Feb 27 but with FOUR amendments:
<b>1. On One Supreme Being: Wherever the words 'gods' or 'goddesses' have been used in the texbooks, they will be replaced either with 'deities', OR with 'Gods' and 'Goddesses' (with upper case G).</b>
This establishes that the Board now recognizes the fact that in Hindu Dharma, we believe in One Supreme Being that manifests in many forms. It is false propaganda on the part of FOSA etc to say that VF/HEF were trying to inject 'monotheism' into Hinduism, when a cursory look of the textbooks would indicate that they already acknowledge the fact that Hinduism talks of one Brahman and various 'gods' and 'goddesses' are 'parts' or 'aspects' of that Brahman (many textbooks actually have entire sections explain the concept of Brahman). This amendment proposed by Dr Johnson, and the accompanying edits merely reinforce the existing narrative of these textbooks, and also highlight the best of Hindu traditions.
<b>2. AIT as a Controversial theory: President Glee Johnson directed all publishers to add the note that AIT is a controversial theory that is not accepted by many scholars.</b>
<b>3. Respect for Hindu Holy Books: All sentences where 'poems', 'stories' etc are used for the Vedas will modified and the word 'scripture' will be used instead.</b>
<b>4. Resolving Contradictions: Glee Johnson acknowledged that there were contradictions on the recommendations made by the Board, and these will be resolved. From the indications available from her in the form of media interviews etc., (which I need not elaborate upon because we should wait for their official final document), this may result in approximately 12-15 additional edits resolved in an acceptable/favorable manner. This should take care of a lot of material in the textbooks that unnecessarily relate the origin of Hinduism and varna system to the hypothetical Aryan invasion theory.</b>
<b>In sum, Dr Bajpai had earlier accepted more than 90% Hindu edits. Witzel led CRP accepted only 37%. On Feb 27, the SBE accepted completely or adequately 70-75% of Hindu edits (depending on how one counts them). And finally, with these four amendments, we expect that overall up to 80-82% of Hindu edits will be accepted (again, the range indicates that the actual acceptance percentage involves subjectivity in calculations).</b>
So it is clear who has 'lost', and who has 'won'. I will do an analysis to show later that Witzel's claim notwithstanding, the coverage women rights and Dalit rights in these textbooks have not improved to any significant extent due to his intervention. If anything, his intervention has robbed Emperor Ashoka of his famed religious tolerance, and has allowed the textbooks to retain caricaturist and innaccurate definitions of Ayurveda, Yoga etc. Contrary to his claims that he has defended the Dalits, I have shown that he accepted 6/7 Hindu edits related to untouchability. Likewise, of the 3 edits related to women, he accepted 1 completely (which removes the negativity from one book completely), and 2 with modifications (that considerably tone down the original text anyway). Hindu edits relating to women rights actually did not touch most of the material of the textbooks anyway. A complete correction of these books was impossible in the first place due to the restrictive nature of edit rules. Finally, Witzel CRP rejected one of the edits of HEF but agreed to a text according to which the 'regional languages of India are derived from Sanskrit'. This robs the independent status of Tamil (HEF edit 44) and it is a pity that 'scholars' have overlooked this important fact.
<b>It appears that the Board became acutely aware that the group of Dalits representing even Evangelist and Sikh organizations were actually trying to back-project today's issues into India's past. This is why it has decided to stick to its decision to approve 6/7 edits related to untouchability (and thereby approve Dr Witzel's agreement with Dr Bajpai also in these 6 cases), and has mandated the use of the word class for 'varna'. This group of Dalits came today as well and delivered in many cases the SAME speeches that they had made last week.</b>
I would like to thank dozens of Hindus who laboriously and with great dexterity, provided copies of authoritative textbooks and journal articles to the Board members very promptly, and this surely made them decide in our favor, despite the innuendos of politicians masquerading as academics. As a Hindu, I would also like to thank more than 100 academics that wrote to the Board in our favor repeatedly, even as recently as this week. Their dignified and scholarly letters elaborating on academic matters related contentious matters in this controversy were in marked contrast to the rhetorical garbage that the Board received from the other side. Credit is also due to the hundreds of parents who sent in their support to Hindu edits to the Board. Per my information, more than 250 parents sent their approval signatures in just the 10 days before the Feb 27 meeting. This demonstrates the extent of support in the community and the fact that our opponents (whose names we see often in connection with political activities) are a fringe group, despite their characteristically high decibel campaign. Frank Pallone and Kumar Barwe wrote in our support, as did many mainstream Indian American organizations such as the National Federation of Indian Associations (NFIA) to my knowledge.
Nevertheless, it should be noted that the fight was on our community edits, and the opponents of Hindu Americans had nothing to lose. It was a 'war of attrition' for us. Hence, anything less than 100% acceptance of our edits is a loss to us. Therefore, I would fully support the HAF in case they do decide to go with a lawsuit. The fact does remain that the entire process was derailed by the gratuitous intervention of a group academics, some of whom have made very
prejudiced remarks against our community. <b>The Board should not have been a party to this calumny, and even when they realized it finally, it was already too late. The speech of Steve Farmer today too was very hilarious (worse than that of Feb 27), and the last laugh will be made by someone else :-)</b> <!--emo&  --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
The Board members nicely stated that textbooks cannot be perfect, and that parents will henceforth play an important role in educating the teachers and their county officials. My personal recommendation is for parents to approach their children's school teachers, and request rejection of certain textbooks such as those of 4 publishers namely McGraw Hill Glencoe, McGraw Hill MacMillan, Holt and OUP because these are worst. Teacher's Curriculum Institute and Pearson-Prentice Hall books are the best.
Alan Bersin acknowledged that the heritage and culture of India is very rich, and no textbook could be perfectly correct in representing our rich and diverse civilization. He stated (as did another Board member), that the entire controversy made them learn a lot about Hinduism, and I think we should thank HEF and VF for spreading awareness of Dharma amongst the Board members. It is the light of Dharma alone that can dispel the darkness of falsehool, and as the national motto of India, quoting the Mundaka Upanishad, says -
 'satyameva jayate' ('Truth alone triumphs').
Let us however take this controversy as just a beginning, because justice and fairness in describing Hinduism in textbooks should be the norm in all states of the great nation that we have chosen to reside in. Those who are threatening that 'Texas will be a greater mess 2 years from now', will face even tougher opposition there because the Hindu American community of TX has already started gearing up for quite some time now, and has been historically very well organized for over a decade. In fact, CA Hindus should acknowledge the very valuable help extended to us by them even in this controversy.
Just two days ago, three of the greatest current scholars of Tamil grammar in Tamil Nadu, India faxed a long handwritten letter to the SBE supporting the efforts of HEF/VF. It is individual acts of love such as these that has helped us tide this situation to a great extent. But again, this is just a beginning, and we need to multiply our efforts to spread awareness, and the light of Dharma so that each community in this land of the free can enjoy their freedom, and appreciate each other's heritage as if it were their own.
Sincerely,
Vishal Agarwal<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Vote on textbooks upsets some Hindus</b>
CHANGES THEY SOUGHT REJECTED BY BOARD
By Lisa M. Krieger
San Jose Mercury News
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews...on/14055497.htm
SACRAMENTO - The State Board of Education voted Wednesday to reject dozens of proposed changes to the way Hinduism is presented in California's sixth-grade textbooks, supporting scholars but disappointing many Hindu parents and advocacy groups.
The board accepted many changes on which there was general agreement, correcting inaccuracies. But it retained controversial descriptions of the roles of women and minorities, migrational history and polytheism.
The 8-0 vote, with two abstentions, resolved a three-month furor over how the ancient religion should be pictured -- with or without its imperfections. The board affirmed a slate of revisions that had previously been recommended by its staff and a board committee.
Many members of the Hindu community, such as the Hindu Education Foundation, the Hindu American Foundation and the Vedic Foundation, believed that issues such as the caste system and discrimination against women did not belong in a sixth-grade introduction to religion. Modern Indo-American children were humiliated by this depiction of their faith, they told the board. One Hindu group, the Hindu American Foundation, is considering legal action to overturn the decision.
But others, including scholars from Stanford, the University of California and other academic institutions, contended that accuracy should prevail -- and that students can learn from historical injustices. They accused the advocacy groups of trying to whitewash history.
The ruling ``represents our best efforts,'' board member Ruth Green said. ``Many ideological fault lines have played out here,'' she said. ``These beliefs are deeply held.''
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Several members of the Legislature wrote a letter of support for the scholars, including Sen. Elaine Alquist, D-San Jose, Assemblyman Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, and Sen. Jackie Speier, D-San Mateo.</span>
In 1987, California rewrote its guidelines for social studies to include the study of religion and its effect on history, emphasizing multiculturalism.
Every six years, the state reviews these textbooks -- and invites public opinion. Because California teaches so many students, decisions made by the State Board of Education have national implications. The textbooks used in California are also used in many other states. This year, for the first time, several factions of the fast-growing Indo-American community organized to fight for their interpretation of history.
Other changes, less controversial, were proposed and accepted by members of the Jewish, Christian and Islamic communities. Language was deleted because it promoted anti-Semitism. For instance, students will now learn that Romans, not Jews, crucified Christ. A sentence was deleted that suggested that God punished the Jews due to their evil ways.
Also dropped is a section that asked students to bring in a Bible to class, as well as an assignment to write a short essay about current attempts to end the violence between Israelis and Palestinians.
Evaluating the proposed changes ``was a great classroom lesson in history,'' board member Alan Berson said. ``It was an extraordinary process. Who we are, as a nation, is embodied in this process . . . acting with honor and civility, passion and intelligence,'' he said.
After the vote, University of California-Berkeley Professor Gautam Premnath said, ``On the whole, we are pleased. . . . The process worked out the way we hoped for. It is an important positive step.''
``<b>They did a terrific job of getting rid of most of the ideological edits,'' said Steve Farmer, a Portola Valley-based scholar of comparative history, who worked with Harvard Professor Michael Witzel in studying the textbooks</b>. <!--emo&:flush--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/Flush.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='Flush.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Members of the Hindu Education Foundation, many of them based in Silicon Valley, were grateful that many of their proposed changes, including several major inaccuracies, were adopted. But they were disappointed that their larger concerns fell on deaf ears.
``It is like putting Band-Aids on a chronic illness -- just a word here and there,'' said Khanderao Kand of Cupertino, representing the Hindu Education Foundation. It had asked the board to appoint another panel of Hindu scholars to review the texts. ``We are unhappy with the process.
``We did what we were allowed to do, within the process. We cannot rewrite the text,'' he said.
He vowed to return in six years -- when the textbooks are reviewed again. ``We will continue to seek more balanced and appropriate presentation of Hinduism. We will be here,'' Kand said.
Stanford student Neepa Acharya, 22, happy with the outcome, said she'll return, too.
``I would like to see every chapter of all the books reviewed, by many groups of people, so that as many people as possible are involved in the discussion.
``We need to get input from many people from many cultural backgrounds -- to unmask the faces in the textbooks,'' she said.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Please check Sen names and they should not get our votes.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->From: Steve Farmer <saf@...>
Date: Thu Mar 9, 2006Â 4:16 pm
Subject: California Political Support for our California Campaign yukifarmer
Offline
Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360ºÂ
Dear List,
List members and journalists in India and elsewhere may be interested
in the political support we gathered in the last few months to help
defeat the sectarian groups involved in the California history textbook
case.
The following letter opposing sectarian edits was sent by 17 leading
members of the California Legislature to the California Board of
Education, the Superintendent of the California Department of
Education, and the Executive Director of the California Curriculum
Committee:
http://www.safarmer.com/legislators.pdf  (500K)
The letter was publicly released before the final Board of Education
Meeting on the textbooks yesterday (8 March 2006). The Board meeting
resulted in the final rejection of the December 2, 2006 edits of the
California textbooks (noted in the letter), which included a long
series of ideological edits inspired by the groups.
The signatures were gathered by the Friends of South Asia (FOSA) and
the Coalition against Communalism (CAC), two of our main allies in the
California case. Both groups are filled with extraordinarily talented
and dedicated people, mainly first and second generation S. Asian
Americans, working in both the corporate and academic worlds:
http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/
http://cac.ektaonline.org/
Prominent signers of the letter include the Senate Majority Leader and
leading members of the State Senate and State Assembly Education
Committees:
Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero, Senate Education Committee
Senator Elaine Alquist, Senate Education Committee
Senator Jackie Speier, Education Committee
Senator Sheila Kuehl
Assemblywoman Judy Chu, Co-Chair, Asian Pacific Islander (API) Caucus
Assemblyman Leland Lee, Co-Chair, API Caucus
Assemblywoman Patty Berg, Vice-Chair of the Womenâs Caucus
Asemblywoman Loni Hancock, Assembly Education Committee
Assemblywoman Carol Liu, Assembly Education Committee
Assemblywoman Barbara Matthews
Assemblywoman Cindy Montenez
Assemblywoman Sally Lieber
Assemblywoman Lori Saldana
Assemblywoman Wilma Chan
Assemblywoman Karen Bass
Assemblywoman Noreen Evans
Assemblyman Alberto Torrico
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
came in email
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Final California Board of Education Decision on Hinduism in Textbooks Better
Than Expected
Hinduism Today
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, March 9, 2006: The California State Board of Education
approved a few additional changes to the proposed textbooks for social studies
at the conclusion of its meeting today. They took public testimony on a proposed
slate of change, or "edits," which was the result of a committee meeting of
February 27 (see HPI, here for the complete background). An excellent
presentation by Janeshwari Devi of the Vedic Foundation, which had spearheaded
the effort to revise the books along with the Hindu Education Foundation,
resulted in 14 additional corrections of contradictions and outright errors in
the list of edits approved February 27. These included, significantly, changes
regarding the Aryan Invasion theory. According to InsideBayArea. com (here),
"The board also instructed the commission to add lines in the textbooks stating
that the Aryan invasion -- the controversial theory that traces the roots of
Hinduism to a migration of people from Central Asia -- is disputed." In all,
most of the edits Hindus sought were granted, while controversial ones regarding
caste, women's rights and other issues were not. These edits were opposed by a
group of Indian leftists and non-Hindu American academics. The Hindu American
Foundation testified at the meeting that the process of consideration of the
edits by the Board failed to follow State guidelines and that they were
considering suing the Board over these lapses. A lawsuit could hold up
production of $300 million worth of social studies books by a dozen publishers
for California schools.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A lawsuit could hold up production of $300 million worth of social studies books by a dozen publishers for California schools.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They should sue them. Whole procedure was fraud, now Alan Bersin's is under investigation. They should also investigate Witzel & Alan Bersin's involvement in whole procedure. Whether they have some financial interest in Books?
A stunning post by Rudradev on BR. My hats off saar..
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->KG and Acharya:
Some time ago I watched a program on National Geographic, about the decision-making behavior of social animals in herds.
The example they gave was of a herd of African antelope-like creatures called Ibex, but I believe this pattern is recapitulated all the way from swarming insects like gnats, to human societies.
The program showed a herd of Ibex grazing on a plain. We were shown that there were three different sources of water around the area, all more or less equally far away and easily accessible.
As the animals grazed, different ones (seemingly at random) wound up facing in the general direction of one or other of the water sources. The numbers facing in the direction of each of the three water sources changed over time with no evident pattern. Apparently some animals changed direction at random, while others were influenced by the attitude of nearby dominant males.
Here's the important thing. At some point, a distinctly larger number of the animals came to face one of the three water sources preferentially over the others. As soon as the 51st percentile of animals turned to face that water source... the entire herd began to move off in the direction of that source. Some lagged, some led, but all moved.
Apparently this behaviour changes somewhat when the herd is aware of predators in the vicinity. Then, it takes a 66% majority facing in one direction to make that decision. Apparently a measure of conservatism kicks in for caution.
It was reported that similar decision making processes occur in all social life-forms, from bees on up.
Layered over as it might be with thousands of years' worth of social evolution, protocols, rituals, prejudices, polemics, egotism, emotionalism, calculations and so on... the core decision-making process of large human societies boils down to much the same. Particularly in democratic societies that respect the liberty of individuals... where decisions are allowed to evolve spontaneously rather than forced en masse by a higher authority as in a totalitarian system. When decisions are to be made as a group, the inhabitants of such societies are often heavily influenced by instincts older than the species itself.
If you look at the attitudes of America's political class with respect to India, the herd's alignment is now distributed at random. A few are pro-India, many are indifferent or ill-informed, some are hostile to various degrees. This is how it has always been, and absent any impetus for change, this is how it would have stayed. Societies, even those of political decision-makers, have an inertia all their own, as defined by the tenets of conventional wisdom.
Towards the end of the Clinton administration, we saw a slight increase in the number of critters facing in the "pro-India" direction. This trend seemed to accelerate in the first months of Bush's regime. Then the predators struck, bringing down the twin towers, and the instinctive conservatism of the herd set in. It seemed better to look once more to traditional allies and old techniques, Pakistan included, at this time of peril. There weren't many takers for a radical change in foreign policy. The random distribution with respect to India continued to hold, by and large.
What has happened with Bush's India trip, J18, etc. is that a very powerful alpha male (capable of influencing critters around him) has executed a clear turnaround in the pro-India direction. I'm not saying that we're anywhere near the critical percentile for a mass shift of attitudes yet... but it has never looked as promising as it does now.
The reason I bring this up is Acharya garu's reference to the Weasel Farmers of Harvard. This is a bunch of alleged academics who ganged up with the FOSA types to stymie Indian-American parents in California, when they were attempting to amend derogatory references to Hinduism and Indian culture in the state's mandated history textbooks.
If an alliance with the US emerges as a fait-accompli, the US will have increasing interests in all aspects of its relationship with India, from military hardware collaboration to the sentiments of Indian-American population. Right now the Weasel Farmers and the California parents are both small fish in a vast ocean of possibilities. If present trends continue, the critical percentile will be passed and the resulting attitude shift will sweep the entire political, academic, and intellectual establishment. The California parents' position will grow ever stronger; the Weasel Farmers, meanwhile, will have to contend with a larger portion of their own herd moving away from the kinds of attitudes they espouse. Ultimately they will have to move with the herd, or straggle behind with the irrelevance of stubborn holdouts (as fair game for any hyenas who might be watching).
For the same reason, FOSA-type anti-India groups of Indian expats will find fewer and fewer takers for their views once the great migration begins. They are tied to left-wing Indian interests which seek to sabotage Indo-US relations in all spheres, and work for a rapproachment with China instead. For now, they are entertained by people like Joseph Pitts who assume an anti-India stance in the current distribution. Once the herd begins to move, FOSA's sponsors will find themselves moving with it for the sake of their own political relevance. Then where will FOSA be?
Please don't take my analogy for oversimplification. I'm not saying that an American is an Ibex, and of course there is a lot more going on in Washington DC than on a breezy savannah in the Serengeti. Yet, if at some level the principles of herd decision-making did not hold true, how would you explain the re-embracing of Pakistan post 9-11?
Sure, Pakistan's cooperation opened up the easiest path to Afghanistan where OBL was hiding, that's the rationale commonly cited. But Pakistan was--and IS-- the source of all Al-Qaeda's operational capability, the ideological and practical fountainhead of anti-Western militant Islamism, and the CIA was never stupid enough to be unaware of this.
Yet the Americans reverted to old, familiar ways of thinking and decided to trust the Pakistan army as an ally against this very terrorism that Pakistan had been instrumental in spawning. What else explains this ridiculous display of faith in the very people behind 9-11... other than a visceral reversion to type, a falling back on conservative world-views when imperilled, a situation where only a very large majority of shifting opinions could draw the behaviour of the whole herd away from ingrained conventional wisdom? Predators were about!
Imagine if Pakistan had never been a Western ally in the Cold War, had never helped out with U2 flights or the Soviet-Afghan war or any of the rest of it. Imagine if Pakistan had been non-aligned just like India. In THAT case, if the ISI had sponsored and groomed an Al-Qaeda type organization to knock down the twin towers and murder 3000 Americans... do you think the US would have sought out Pervus Meretricius as an ally? I very much doubt it. They would have flattened the whole place.
In the end, it was the familiarity of dealing with a servile RAPE in uniform that attracted the Americans to this disastrous enlistment of a terrorist state in the war on terror.
It has taken five long years for the aftershock of 9-11, and the attendent herd-conservatism, to wear off. Finally the American political class is ready to entertain new possibilities, especially when...as with Pakistan... it couldn't be more apparent that the old ones are failing miserably. Finally, we're in a situation where the critical percentage necessary for a sea change has dropped once more, to the point where a bold President just might influence the attitude of the whole herd with a visionary move.
The President could yet fail. I'm not nearly as optimistic as KGoan. Bush's poll numbers have never been so low, and he's getting slammed at every turn... Dubai ports deal, Katrina redux, Iraq tumbling into full-scale civil war, the economy continuing to stink. This alpha male might not have it in him to influence a critical percentage of the herd, anymore. His whole initiative may yet fizzle out with a limp and a quack, and anti-Indian lobbies including the non-proliferationists may arrest any change in the larger attitude to India of the American political class.
Also, I'm not as sanguine as KGoan about the long term. Remember... once a herd, always a herd... and we are as much of a herd as the Americans. Herds go where the majority think the water is at any given time. No permanent friends, only permanent interests. If Bush is to India what Nixon was to China... so what? China and the US were hardly ever "allies" in any traditional sense, and they certainly aren't today.
Yet, the fact that we at least have some temporary friends who have demonstrated their current good intentions... is a cause for at least a little celebration.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
03-11-2006, 06:34 AM
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2006, 06:36 AM by Amber G..)
According to IER site, Prof Witzel gives a press conference announcing total victory agianst "Hindutva Forces" and what he called "HINDUTVA ROUT IN CALIFORNIA"
Here is a similar case where honorable spokesman declaring total victory over the infidel forces (US FORCES ARE BEING ROUTED IN IRAQ)
<img src='http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/images/choppermugs.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
(With Thanks to R!)
Prof Witzel, you racist [edit], there are many young so called "Hindu Nationalists" like me around, we ain't goin anywhere. We are going to be in your face for decades to come, the defiant shall win!
<b>How Does California Teach about Hinduism?</b>
Vamsee Juluri
San Francisco Chronicle, March 6, 2006
www.sfgate.com<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/06/EDGU9GJCQH1.DTL&hw=hindu&sn=014&sc=247>
California textbooks contribute to ignorance about Hindu: Vamsee Juluri
Has Hinduism been insulted in California history textbooks? Will the state be forced to change the six new social studies textbooks' depictions of this religion? The state Board of Education is scheduled to have the last word on the matter this week when the full board votes on adopting the new texts. In the meantime, Hindu parents are outraged, academics have counterattacked and the local Hindu community is at war, all at a moment when President Bush is saying that India and America are "global leaders and good friends." I am an academic, but I feel the moral obligation to line up with the outraged parents and demand a change in the textbooks for California middle-school students. This manufactured ignorance of Hinduism and Indian culture has not only hurt the feelings of immigrant children, but has also had a geopolitical cost for the United States by delaying what should have been a natural alliance between the two secular democracies. That alliance has finally begun to flower, with President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's historic nuclear agreement. Despite the opposition from various quarters, the president's visit has achieved at least one thing. It shows
that the two countries are serious about working together on issues ranging
from security and trade to education and culture. The future of this relationship, however, depends on rejecting old frameworks and mistaken assumptions. The ugly misrepresentations in the textbooks are a part of that old error, and have no place in the future.
I therefore disagree with the academics, some of the world's leading experts on South Asia, India and Hinduism, who have preferred to see the demands for changes in the textbook as part of a "Hindu extremist conspiracy" rather than an issue of correcti ng past errors. I am no supporter of religious extremism, where it exists, but that's not the issue here. The issue here is the need to correct three mistakes:
First, there is a problem with the California textbooks defining Hinduism as the religion of caste and gender discrimination. This has been opposed by the Hindu community for a number of reasons, including fairness (other religions are not defined largely by their faults) and, of course, accuracy. I am not naive to suggest these problems did not or do not exist, but there are more useful ways to address them than in the first lesson schoolchildren ever have about a religion's beliefs.
Second, the term "Hinduism" refers to a complex diversity of traditions that are difficult to unify or summarize in terms of founders, dates and origins. But this is Hinduism's virtue, not a problem. The story of Hinduism in California's textbooks, to begin with, is out of sync with how Hinduism is lived by its followers. For e xample, many textbooks, even in India, talk about Hinduism as the religion of "Aryan invaders." The critiques and counter critiques of this are complex, but what is relevant here is that no one ever dwells on this "Aryan" origin in their religion, their prayers or their religious practices. Third, the dismissal in some of these textbooks of Hindu "myths" is plainly insulting. If Hindus think about Elephant Gods writing epics and Monkey Gods leaping over oceans, they are neither ignorant nor are merely celebrating their "stories." For devout Hindus, these are not characters from a fairy tale; these are the Gods (and "Gods" does not deny the fact that Hindus also think of "God" in the singular).
The need to correct these mistakes is great because there has been a
history of stereotyping and misrepresentation of Hinduism, from Katherine Mayo's vicious 1927 book "Mother India," (which Mohandas Gandhi, no foe of criticism, called a "drain-inspector's report," designed only to give a graphic description of the stench from open drains) to the 1984 "Indiana Jones" movie with its bizarre fantasies about Indian dining customs. Stereotypes such as these have kept India from being better understood in the United States, and perpetuating them is not in the interest of either nation.
This is what being a scholar has taught me. As for what my religion has taught me, it is that religion, any religion, is like a mother. It has made us who we are and is there for us to better ourselves and the world around us. To use the name of a great religion as a synonym for vileness, as a few scholars have done in this debate, is not just unscholarly, it is very hurtful. I am tempted to say to them, what you are doing here is savaging the mother of a civilization.
Vamsee Juluri is an associate professor of media studies at the University of San Francisco and the author of "Becoming a Global Audience: Longing and Belonging in Indian Music Television," (Peter Lang, 2003).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Hindu group plans to file lawsuit over textbook changes
Foundation says state didn't meet academic standards with edits</b>
Article Last Updated: 03/11/2006 3:52 AM PST
The Daily Review, Insidebayarea.com March 11, 2006
By Jonathan Jones, STAFF WRITER
FREMONT â The Hindu American Foundation, one of three Hindu groups demanding revisions to California's sixth-grade history textbooks, says it intends to file a lawsuit against the state over its approval process.
Mihir Meghani, a Fremont resident and president of the foundation, said the organization contends that some of the passages in the textbooks misrepresent ancient Indian history as it relates to the rights of women, the caste system and Hindu theology.
"Overall, the state is compelled to treat religions fairly in terms of the education of California students," Meghani said. "What they failed to do is present Hinduism on par with other religions."
On Wednesday, the state adopted revisions proposed by a subcommittee, but,
in an apparent attempt to accommodate complaints by some Hindu groups,
they also directed the publishers to make minor adjustments with regard to sacred Hindu texts and contested Aryan invasion theory.
In adopting the changes, Meghani said, the state failed to meet academic standards of fairness in its approval process. He also suggested that the Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation, the two primary Hindu groups that lobbied the state, were treated differently than religious advocacy groups.
While the state adopted more than 70 percent of the edits proposed by the foundations, Meghani insisted the textbooks still fail to accurately portray ancient India and the roots of Hinduism.
"Some of the social problems are inappropriately labeled as part of Hinduism, like caste discrimination and rights of women," Meghani said. "Other religions are not depicted like that. For example, the textbooks teach that Islam raises the status of women. And there's no section on women and Christianity. We need balance."
Meghani contends it's a mistake to take India's current social problems and
include them as part of ancient history.
"India has a problem with caste discrimination, but most Hindus do not support the caste system," Meghani said. "We need to address our internal dynamics and the fact we do have social problems. Although it's not a part of Hinduism, it's a part of our heritage and we need to deal with those issues effectively."
State board members, who were meeting throughout the day in Sacramento,
were unavailable for comment.
http://www.insidebayarea.com/dailyreview/l...news/ci_3592306
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>*Press Release*: *Hindu American Foundation Prepares for Litigation Against California State Board of Education*</b>
**
SACRAMENTO, Ca (Mar. 9, 2006) â The Hindu American Foundation (HAF), through
its law firm, has been in continual correspondence with the California State Board of Education (SBE) and California Department of Education (CDE) for the past several months demanding a fair and open process in the textbook adoption process. HAF became involved after two Hindu groups, the Hindu Education Foundation (HEF) and Vedic Foundation (VF) attempted to work with the SBE to ensure an accurate and balanced portrayal of Hinduism in sixth grade textbooks. <b>This process was sidetracked according to Hindu parents in California by the involvement of a minority of politically motivated academics and radical anti-Hindu groups.</b>
On March 8, 2006, despite numerous communications by HAF highlighting procedural irregularities and resulting substantive inaccuracies, the California State Board of Education (SBE) voted to approve recommendations by the SBE/CDE Staff on February 27, 2006, to retain several statements and themes in the textbooks that had insulted Hindus.
"Thousands of Hindu parents and several Hindu academics that engaged the SBE
to ensure a fair representation of Hinduism in textbooks are disenfranchised by this hollow decision," said Suhag Shukla, Esq., legal counsel of HAF. "Of all religious groups that followed a set process to submit edits and corrections to textbooks, only the Hindus were treated to an uneven and constantly changing playing field, and only their submissions were politicized in this unseemly political charade. This is not simply an injustice to Hindu Americans, but all Americans who believe in the democratic process."
In a final letter to the SBE on March 3, 2006, HAF held that private determinations have been made and implemented to subvert the public process, including the formation of a subcommittee to handle the matter and creation of the now approved February 27th SBE/CDE staff recommendations.
Critically, the HAF wrote, the January 6th closed door meeting, from which deliberations formed the basis of the now-approved edits, was held in direct violation of California Open Meeting Act by the presence of several members of the SBE.
Further evidence of the SBE's apparent lack of concern for the public process is the February 27, 2006 public hearing, where after five hours of public comment, the subcommittee moved to recommend approval of the SBE/CDE staff recommendations with absolutely no deliberation.
Preparation for litigation is currently underway. HAF will file suit against the SBE early next week.
http://www.hinduamericanfoundation.org/med..._litigation.htm
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A quick search and could not find the URL, but Weasel writes in Dawn...
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Dawn, March 12, 2006
Defeat for Hindutva revisionists
By Michael Witzel</b>
THE intense struggle over the presentation of ancient Indian history in school books in California ended on March 8 with total victory over the right wing and sub-sectarian Hindutva foundations, the so-called Vedic Foundation (VF) and the Hindu Education Foundation (HEF).
The California State Board of Education (SBE) voted unanimously to overturn the sectarian and politically motivated distortions pushed through by the two obscurant Hindutva foundations during an earlier phase of the review process for history textbooks. On February 27, a sub-committee of the SBE had also voted unanimously to overturn a majority of the disputed changes.
This decision is a victory for all Americans and all others worldwide who are interested in the historically correct depiction of Indian history.
<b>More than a hundred South Asian scholars</b>Â Â <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> from across the United States and more than fifty American and international Indologists had written to the Board, protesting the changes proposed by the Hindutva groups. The SBE had also received important scholarly input from South Asian Studies faculty in the US as well as other Indologists. In addition, many Indian American community organizations and many private individuals have been working diligently to ensure that ahistorical and sectarian content proposed by Hindutva groups does not infect California school textbooks.
We must wholeheartedly applaud the courage of various individuals and community organizations, who in spite of being constantly harassed, abused and threatened by various Hindutvavadins, stood their ground and put in a tremendous effort to defend the educational futures of their children.
All involved in fighting for this goal have expressed their admiration of the State Board for rejecting the most egregious edits proposed by the Hindutva groups that attempted to sanitize caste and gender oppression. The victory over the machinations of the VF & HEF is especially poignant as it has been achieved on International Womenâs day, March 8th.
We must applaud the State Board for voting on the side of historical accuracy, and for not caving to the intimidation and blackmail tactics of HEF and VF who, failing to obtain any academic or other scholarly support, <b>have now turned to a politically connected law firm and are issuing threats of legal action in a desperate attempt to intimidate the Board of Education</b>, and to force the Board to divert precious resources that could have gone towards the education of California school children.
We also must commend the SBE staff for having patiently considered a wide variety of views from community groups, as well as from scholars. With the changes recommended by the SBE, the textbooks are a vast improvement over earlier textbooks and are now largely free of errors. We must note with appreciation the stance taken by Ms Ruth Green, President of the History-Social Science Sub-committee, that the textbooks should represent the plurality of scholarly opinion.
<b>We must also thank the community organizations such as Friends of South Asia (FOSA),<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'> Federation of Tamil Sangams of North America (FeTNA), </span>various Dalit organizations (Ambedkar.org, New Republic India, Dalit Freedom Network, Dalit Sikh temples), Coalition Against Communalism (CAC) and Indian American Public Education Advisory Council (IPAC). </b> We must especially commend the representatives of Dalit organizations, who urged the SBE to restore references to Dalits and the caste system, which had been deleted from the textbooks on HEFâs and VFâs recommendations. Individual Dalits and their organizations have suffered the crassest abuse and vituperation from the self-styled representatives of the Hindu Indo-American community. Their eloquent and moving testimonies which outlined the daily depredations that Dalits face was crucial as it laid bare the hollowness and dishonesty of the HEF and VF agenda.
The combined efforts against the attempts by Hindutva groups to distort Californiaâs textbooks have resulted in a crushing defeat of these obscurantist views. After a long struggle, historical accuracy and a balanced depiction of life in ancient India has prevailed, not the sugar-coated version of a hoary, mythical Golden Age that never was.
<i>The writer is a <b>professor of South Asian Studies </b>Â <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> at Harvard University and provided the California State Board of Education expert testimony on the proposed textbook changes.</i>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
|
