11-27-2005, 09:39 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-27-2005, 09:42 AM by Bharatvarsh.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->no tipu wasnt and haider ali neither.
yet they think of them as some sort of saviour.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You provide us proof instead of providing antecdotes about asking andhraites and the rest of the rubbish, even if people think so it only shows the brainwashing power of Doordarshan, in Bengal a lot of children are being commie brainwashed.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->ambedkar gave a voice to the voiceless and since he drafted the constitution i am surmising that he was largely instrumental in incorporating the positive discrimination scheme that we have (and which i support, except for scheduled tribes... because if the AIT is wrong than the tribes were not oppressed) <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ya keep eulogising him and you talk as if drafting the constituition deserves special attention just because Ambedkar happened to do it when infact numerous people worked on the constituition itself, from shouries book:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Shourie also takes a lot of pains to prove that Ambedkar was not the sole author of the constitution and that after all a magnificent document like the constitution could not have had a single author. He proves this by thoroughly describing how the constitution was framed. Ambedkar was the chairman of the Drafting committee whose purpose was to put into words whatever the constituent assembly thought. The ideas were mainly that of the Congress leadership. Shourie also demonstrated how the final constitution was so very different from what Ambedkar had all along advocated.
Nevertheless one gets the feeling that this part of the book is a bit too long and unnecessary when Ambedkar himself had never proclaimed that he was the sole author of the constitution and he had infact issued many disclaimers to the contrary.
http://www.indolink.com/Book/book8.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The second part of the book traces the actual drafting of the constitution. Besides pointing out the fact that the constitution as it exists today is a variation on the drafts authored by KM Munshi and others, Shourie also cites from officially printed books on the debates in the drafting committee itself to drive home the point that if anything, Ambedkar was nothing more than an impassive and helpless bystander - a figurehead, if there ever was one.
http://www.agni.org/braindump/entries/00000071.htm<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
By the same token, todays positive discrimination towards Muslims must also be laid at his door step.
yet they think of them as some sort of saviour.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You provide us proof instead of providing antecdotes about asking andhraites and the rest of the rubbish, even if people think so it only shows the brainwashing power of Doordarshan, in Bengal a lot of children are being commie brainwashed.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->ambedkar gave a voice to the voiceless and since he drafted the constitution i am surmising that he was largely instrumental in incorporating the positive discrimination scheme that we have (and which i support, except for scheduled tribes... because if the AIT is wrong than the tribes were not oppressed) <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ya keep eulogising him and you talk as if drafting the constituition deserves special attention just because Ambedkar happened to do it when infact numerous people worked on the constituition itself, from shouries book:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Shourie also takes a lot of pains to prove that Ambedkar was not the sole author of the constitution and that after all a magnificent document like the constitution could not have had a single author. He proves this by thoroughly describing how the constitution was framed. Ambedkar was the chairman of the Drafting committee whose purpose was to put into words whatever the constituent assembly thought. The ideas were mainly that of the Congress leadership. Shourie also demonstrated how the final constitution was so very different from what Ambedkar had all along advocated.
Nevertheless one gets the feeling that this part of the book is a bit too long and unnecessary when Ambedkar himself had never proclaimed that he was the sole author of the constitution and he had infact issued many disclaimers to the contrary.
http://www.indolink.com/Book/book8.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The second part of the book traces the actual drafting of the constitution. Besides pointing out the fact that the constitution as it exists today is a variation on the drafts authored by KM Munshi and others, Shourie also cites from officially printed books on the debates in the drafting committee itself to drive home the point that if anything, Ambedkar was nothing more than an impassive and helpless bystander - a figurehead, if there ever was one.
http://www.agni.org/braindump/entries/00000071.htm<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
By the same token, todays positive discrimination towards Muslims must also be laid at his door step.