06-03-2004, 12:29 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->History is only for learning but we should say things and write things as the way we see it at this time. In the past, The Hindu and Indian Express are rabid anti-Congress newspapers. It isn't the case now. Is it? So why don't we leave history to the historians and deal with present days issues and expose these rogues? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
History is not merely for learning from past mistakes, although that is its prime lesson.
But one should not falsify History in order to make a point. You had made the point that since TOI was owned by Bennett Coleman and Co, it was controlled by somebody in UK. That is of course false ever since India became independent. TOI is fully owned by the Jain family . So what is the consequence of this misrepresentation. We cannot in a facile manner attribute the writings in TOI to a foreign presence. It is far worse, these policies in TOI are being fashioned by Indians. In any event sloppy facts make for sloppy conclusions.
Secondly the Hindu and IE are not pro congress but anti BJP. There is a big difference. They see the Congress as the lesser of two evils .The Hindu is completely a communist paper under the leadership of N Ram who is a chamcha of the Chinese. I do not know where the patronage for Shekhar Gupta and Verghese comes from but i woud not be surprised if there were extra territorial connections there.
Finally if we leave History to the historians , we will be in the spot we are in today, where the NCERT textbooks written by communists gives a completely false portrayal of Indian history and teaches Indian kids among other facts (?) that India was constantly invaded and that there never was an indigenous civilizaiton in India and that everything good in india came from somewhere else. It is such a cavalier attitude to History that has brought us to such a pretty pass where most of the History that we learn today has been now retold by foreigners who had no interest in the preservation of the Indian republic or its past. The lesson here is if we abandon History to whoever, then the narrators of Indian history will very happily feed you a version that is more consonant with their own agenda and which has very little relationship to the truth.
Your final point is well taken, that we must deal with the present, but even here we cannot afford to forget that past is prologue to the present.
History is not merely for learning from past mistakes, although that is its prime lesson.
But one should not falsify History in order to make a point. You had made the point that since TOI was owned by Bennett Coleman and Co, it was controlled by somebody in UK. That is of course false ever since India became independent. TOI is fully owned by the Jain family . So what is the consequence of this misrepresentation. We cannot in a facile manner attribute the writings in TOI to a foreign presence. It is far worse, these policies in TOI are being fashioned by Indians. In any event sloppy facts make for sloppy conclusions.
Secondly the Hindu and IE are not pro congress but anti BJP. There is a big difference. They see the Congress as the lesser of two evils .The Hindu is completely a communist paper under the leadership of N Ram who is a chamcha of the Chinese. I do not know where the patronage for Shekhar Gupta and Verghese comes from but i woud not be surprised if there were extra territorial connections there.
Finally if we leave History to the historians , we will be in the spot we are in today, where the NCERT textbooks written by communists gives a completely false portrayal of Indian history and teaches Indian kids among other facts (?) that India was constantly invaded and that there never was an indigenous civilizaiton in India and that everything good in india came from somewhere else. It is such a cavalier attitude to History that has brought us to such a pretty pass where most of the History that we learn today has been now retold by foreigners who had no interest in the preservation of the Indian republic or its past. The lesson here is if we abandon History to whoever, then the narrators of Indian history will very happily feed you a version that is more consonant with their own agenda and which has very little relationship to the truth.
Your final point is well taken, that we must deal with the present, but even here we cannot afford to forget that past is prologue to the present.