Post 22 (Ramana):
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But next year, we will try and link it with history and history will become a matter of popular struggle, because history we believe is not to be treated as something of the past or settled. What India really means, what Indiaâs national identity should be, is still a matter of debate in this country. Which is why I think the 150th anniversary of 1857 gives us an opportunity and it is also our duty to celebrate the glorious tradition of peoplesâ revolt in this country, especially with all these new interpretations of 1857 coming up â like looking at 1857 through the prism of âclash of civilizationsâ and the post-9/11 kind of discourse .<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is exactly the communist view of history: an extreme version of the christoislamic (and what had therefore long been the 'western') view of history. The past is no longer an objective list of what happened, when, by whom, and for what reasons as given by the historical characters themselves or by their biographers. But rather, history becomes what said communist or other twister thinks (should have) happened, when they want it to have happened, why they want it to have happened and how they wanted it to have happened or turned out. The <i>why</i> here is perhaps the most important, that's why the like the idea of 'new interpretations' and wish to look at it through the "prism of Clash of Civilizations and the post-9/11 discourse". (The attack on WTC of course had nothing to do with 1857, but it does to communists and others as they plan for it to serve their purpose in this case, whatever that may be.)
As to why it is that they want to look at history in a different way is because they have decided what the outcome of this new version of history should be. They're just reverse engineering from their goals of how the present should be viewed: changing history to suit what they want the present (and therefore the future) to be. They indicate it here:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What India really means, what Indiaâs national identity should be, is still a matter of debate in this country.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->They think India's identity is (or should be) a matter of debate, and they want to enter this - what they perceive to be a - debate, and tell us what the national identity should be. (How about they stuff their opinions where the sun don't shine?)
This is the christoislamic way: history only means something if it says something glorious about christoislamism. (For example, reading the early fathers of the church, all the early conquests for christ were made out to be the will of their gawd. As were the later ones. In islam too, pre-islamic Arabia was completely demonised, made to look so uncivilised so that it would always compare unfavourably to the hell brought on by islam.) And, communism being a christoislamic offspring does the same thing. And again, the case of 1857 is going to mean something to do them only because they have a plan to <i>make</i> it relevant to communism. Making it relevant by force-fitting, as usual.
None of these loser ideologies care anything for truth, they think of truth as a sockpuppet that they can put their hand into and move its mouth to speak whatever they want it to say. History is an 'open for all to grab and manoevre as you please' business. So all the frauds are jumping at the sockpuppet to be the one to control it. Communists, like the others, think it's first come, first served.
'History' as per the Christoislamic-communist ideologies should always be put in quotes, so everyone knows what a travesty it is.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But next year, we will try and link it with history and history will become a matter of popular struggle, because history we believe is not to be treated as something of the past or settled. What India really means, what Indiaâs national identity should be, is still a matter of debate in this country. Which is why I think the 150th anniversary of 1857 gives us an opportunity and it is also our duty to celebrate the glorious tradition of peoplesâ revolt in this country, especially with all these new interpretations of 1857 coming up â like looking at 1857 through the prism of âclash of civilizationsâ and the post-9/11 kind of discourse .<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is exactly the communist view of history: an extreme version of the christoislamic (and what had therefore long been the 'western') view of history. The past is no longer an objective list of what happened, when, by whom, and for what reasons as given by the historical characters themselves or by their biographers. But rather, history becomes what said communist or other twister thinks (should have) happened, when they want it to have happened, why they want it to have happened and how they wanted it to have happened or turned out. The <i>why</i> here is perhaps the most important, that's why the like the idea of 'new interpretations' and wish to look at it through the "prism of Clash of Civilizations and the post-9/11 discourse". (The attack on WTC of course had nothing to do with 1857, but it does to communists and others as they plan for it to serve their purpose in this case, whatever that may be.)
As to why it is that they want to look at history in a different way is because they have decided what the outcome of this new version of history should be. They're just reverse engineering from their goals of how the present should be viewed: changing history to suit what they want the present (and therefore the future) to be. They indicate it here:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What India really means, what Indiaâs national identity should be, is still a matter of debate in this country.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->They think India's identity is (or should be) a matter of debate, and they want to enter this - what they perceive to be a - debate, and tell us what the national identity should be. (How about they stuff their opinions where the sun don't shine?)
This is the christoislamic way: history only means something if it says something glorious about christoislamism. (For example, reading the early fathers of the church, all the early conquests for christ were made out to be the will of their gawd. As were the later ones. In islam too, pre-islamic Arabia was completely demonised, made to look so uncivilised so that it would always compare unfavourably to the hell brought on by islam.) And, communism being a christoislamic offspring does the same thing. And again, the case of 1857 is going to mean something to do them only because they have a plan to <i>make</i> it relevant to communism. Making it relevant by force-fitting, as usual.
None of these loser ideologies care anything for truth, they think of truth as a sockpuppet that they can put their hand into and move its mouth to speak whatever they want it to say. History is an 'open for all to grab and manoevre as you please' business. So all the frauds are jumping at the sockpuppet to be the one to control it. Communists, like the others, think it's first come, first served.
'History' as per the Christoislamic-communist ideologies should always be put in quotes, so everyone knows what a travesty it is.