How the Marxist Eminent Historians Created a Gated Community of Traitors: The Conclusion
History Vignettes

How the Marxist Eminent Historians Created a Gated Community of Traitors: The Conclusion

Marxist historians have inflicted a multi-layered deception on the national psyche which has disfigured the minds of at least three generations of Indians.

Sandeep Balakrishna

Sandeep Balakrishna

We can depart from Arun Shourie's shocking and depressing account of the misdeeds of our Marxist eminent historians with his observation about Bipan Chandra.

Later I learnt that the Rs 75,000 which had been allotted to this "eminent historian" for this project - "the Oral History Project" - had been but a part, a small part of the total take. Bipan Chandra was given in addition Rs two lakhs by the ICSSR and Rs four lakhs through the Jawaharlal Nehru University. Neither institution received any manuscript from him.

Neither institution received any manuscript not just from Bipan Chandra but from the hundreds of Bipan Chandraesque clones. In plain language, none of these swindlers and generation-destroyers were held accountable for a simple and now, widely-known reason: a Congress minister or MP or a CPI(M) troublemaker was just a phone call away. While we're on the subject, there is another book desperately waiting to be written: Eminent Bureaucrats. I'm willing to mentor the arduous, patient and patriotic young man who wishes to take up the initiative. The sorry and dangerous, lived outcome of this toxic nexus of bureaucrats and academics in the history establishment is best captured in these lines by Terry Pratchett.

If you do not know where you come from, then you don't know where you are, and if you don't know where you are, then you don't know where you're going. And if you don't know where you're going, you're probably going wrong.

You can still salvage the nation and civilisation that has merely lost its way. However, even the most honest and well-intentioned leaders and people cannot salvage a nation and civilisation which has lost its direction. In India's case, this directionlessness was imposed from the top deliberately, systematically and calculatedly with a Jihadi's zeal for enjoying everlasting bliss in the arms of 72 virgins.

By today's fallen standards, if one were to perchance overlook these financial crimes going by the "small" sums our Marxist eminent historians swindled, the all-round intellectual and generational carnage that they have inflicted on the historical memory of three generations of Hindus is unforgivable. But for this wholesale perversion of history and industrial-scale whitewashing of Islam-inspired genocide of Hindus, movies like Deewaar would have never been made, which as I had noted, was a highly effective and artistic way to make Hindus halal for the cause of Allah’s ever-expanding dominions.

Perhaps the greatest disservice and the greatest act of actually disrupting social harmony in “independent” India has been the role of these Marxist historians in continually heightening communal tensions most notably during the Babri Masjid era, a pivotal point in India's history. To get just a whiff of the nature of the damage they have inflicted, we will allow Dr Koenraad Elst to speak:

In my study of the Ayodhya controversy, I noticed that the frequent attempts to conceal or deny inconvenient evidence were an integral part of a larger effort to rewrite India's history and to whitewash Islam. It struck me that this effort to deny the unpleasant facts of Islam's destructive role in Indian history is similar to the attempts by some European writers to deny the Nazi Holocaust. Its goal and methods are similar, even though its social position is very different: in Europe, Holocaust negationists are a fringe group shunned by respectable people, but in India the jihad negationists are in control of the academic establishment and of the press.

Dr Elst's note on jihad negationism has a perfect echo in Dr Pandey's note about Majumdar's accurate observation about how "the Hindu leaders, including Gandhi and Nehru, deliberately ignored the fundamental differences between the Hindus and Muslims..." in their quest to attain an artificial harmony between the two based not on lived, historical realities but wishful thinking. It is this lazy or timid or short-sighted ignoring that eventually led to wholesale distortion, suppression, and even inventing historical "facts" by Communists.

The story of these realities must be told, at least now, to build a nation based on accepting and digesting even the harshest of historical truths. The story must be retold in every Hindu home. In a manner similar to how grandparents of a past generation inspired their grandchildren with stories of Prahlada, Dhruva, Maharana Pratap, Shivaji, Ranjit Singh, to cite a few names at random. Our school textbooks are short-sighted, ill-equipped, and incompetent to tell these stories any time soon. These efforts definitely take courage and involve enormous hard work but they are inevitable and urgent unless Hindus are not serious about surviving as a civilization. The alternative is to pretend that these urgly historical truths don't exist. As with people so with problems: at some point, the makeup will peel away.

As a recent example, had our history been told honestly right from childhood, nobody would've even conceived naming a road in the honour of Aurangzeb. That we had to face outrage from these same jihad-deniers and thousands of urban Indians misled by reading such "history" shows what happens when denial and pretence are preferred to avoid facing harsh truths - or to push deadly, imperialist ideologies.

The same - if not greater - damage that the anti-Hindu and the Adharmic Nehruvian state inflicted in the economic space has been inflicted by more than six decades of writing, teaching and propagating Nehruvian history. Only, its toll has been incalculable: with each passing decade, India's accommodative diversity rooted in Dharma has steadily morphed into irreconcilable difference to the extent that significant and influential sections of Indians now see nothing wrong in inviting foreign powers to intervene in India's sovereign affairs. The most glaring example of this in recent years is the shameless manner in which members of these influential sections of the Islamo-Christist-Left-Liberal cabal urged the Kangaroo Court called “USCIRF” to depose Narendra Modi.

Indeed, let’s hear it directly from the horse’s mouth. Here's Dr Dilip K Chakrabarti recounting Romila Thapar's "vision" of India at the end of the 21st Century.

In the case of India Thapar, in an interview to the French paper Le Monde, foresaw (cf M Danino in Dialogue, April-June 2006/vol 7, no 4) that by the end of the 21st century India would break down into a series of small states federated within a more viable single economic space on the scale of the subcontinent.

What Romila Thapar is actually saying: it is my passionate wish to see India breaking up into pieces. And she and her gang members have taught history to and written history textbooks prescribed for our school and college children. The sum and substance of their (nearly) century-long India war to break India is this: the creation of a gated community of three generations of traitors.

In a more sane world, these eminent disgraces would have correctly remained in the fringes - like the Holocaust deniers in Europe - had honest scholars like R.C. Majumdar not been shunned and hounded out solely because they didn't dance to a specific political - or person's - tune. Indeed, it is very revealing about the person of Jawaharlal Nehru and Maulana Azad if they felt threatened by a dispassionate assessment of India’s freedom struggle, of one of the most important episodes in world history. And Majumdar was just one of the hundreds of such Himalayan scholars of the period, who were victimised by an insecure autocrat.

On the other side, it is also true that powerful counters were offered against this all-round assault against Indian history by fierce and courageous intellectual warriors like Sita Ram Goel, Ram Swarup et al but when oppressive regimes tire out of continual hounding, and become helpless in the face of irrefutable facts, they resort to strangling by silence. This among other tactics was how our eminent disgraces silenced the voices of Sita Ram Goel et al: they completely ignored them. They refused to acknowledge that such people even existed much less mentioned their work.

In the end, India had to wait till 1998 for Arun Shourie’s Eminent Historians to be published - a book that uncovered in detail after ghastly detail of this multi-layered deception and defacing of the national psyche that has disfigured the minds of at least three generations regarding the vital truths of their own nation.

And thanks to Arun Shourie's seminal contribution, the term “eminent historian” justly become a swearword in public discourse today.

Concluded

Series Notes:

1. R.C. Majumdar: History of the Freedom movement in India, Vol I: pp xii-xiii

2. B.N. Pandey: The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, No 1/2 [Apr 1966, pp 86-87]

3. Dr N.S. Rajaram: ICHR: Are they 'eminent historians' or ordinary criminals in scholars' robes? FOLKS Mag, June 2012

4. Dr D.K. Chakrabarti: Romila Thapar and the Study of Ancient India: History as propaganda - FOLKS Mag, June 2012. Ed by Dr N.S. Rajaram

5. Utpal Kumar: ICHR turns white elephant with its projects guzzling up crores-Mail Today, 17 July 2015

6. Arun Shourie: Eminent Historians: Their Technology, Their Line, Their Fraud, 1998

7. Dr Koenraad Elst: Negationism in India, Concealing the Record of Islam, 1993,Voice of India, pp 1-2

8. For example, the USCIRF testimony of Kamal Mitra Chenoy. See: https://www.coe.int/t/dg3/socialpolicies/source/Moscow%20Conf%20speeches/serbia.pdf

The Dharma Dispatch is now available on Telegram! For original and insightful narratives on Indian Culture and History, subscribe to us on Telegram.

The Dharma Dispatch
www.dharmadispatch.in