What's new

My blood boils!

PeaceForAll

BANNED
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
246
Reaction score
0
I have no words for this. I was going through history of colonization (for my thesis) and came across this. Sharing with you all. I, for one, am totally heart broke, and ravaged thinking how our culture, language and self esteem were raped.. i have no better word for it. its simple r@pe!

==================================



The first selection a speech on the India bill of 1833 and expresses his view of the achievements and goals of the British Empire in the East. Between 1834 and 1838 he lived in Calcutta and served on the British "Supreme Council for India". His "Minute on Education, " from which the second selection below comes, touches on the relation of Western and Indian civilizations.

Education and the English Empire in India

I feel that, for the good of India itself, the admission of natives to high office must be effected by slow degrees. But that, when the fulness of time is come, when the interest of India requires the change, we ought to refuse to make that change lest we should endanger our own power, this is a doctrine of which I cannot think without indignation. Governments, like men, may buy existence too dear. "Propter vitam vivendi perdere causas," ["To lose the reason for living, for the sake of staying alive"] is a despicable policy both in individuals and in states. In the present case, such a policy would be not only despicable, but absurd. The mere extent of empire is not necessarily an advantage. To many governments it has been cumbersome; to some it has been fatal. It will be allowed by every statesman of our time that the prosperity of a community is made up of the prosperity of those who compose the community, and that it is the most childish ambition to covet dominion which adds to no man's comfort or security. To the great trading nation, to the great manufacturing nation, no progress which any portion of the human race can make in knowledge, in taste for the conveniences of life, or in the wealth by which those conveniences are produced, can be matter of indifference. It is scarcely possible to calculate the benefits which we might derive from the diffusion of European civilisation among the vast population of the East. It would be, on the most selfish view of the case, far better for us that the people of India were well governed and independent of us, than ill governed and subject to us; that they were ruled by their own kings, but wearing our broadcloth, and working with our cutlery, than that they were performing their salams to English collectors and English magistrates, but were too ignorant to value, or too poor to buy, English manufactures. To trade with civilised men is infinitely more profitable than to govern savages. That would, indeed, be a doting wisdom, which, in order that India might remain a dependency, would make it an useless and costly dependency, which would keep a hundred millions of men from being our customers in order that they might continue to be our slaves.

Are we to keep the people of India ignorant in order that we may keep them submissive? Or do we think that we can give them knowledge without awakening ambition? Or do we mean to awaken ambition and to provide it with no legitimate vent? Who will answer any of these questions in the affirmative? Yet one of them must be answered in the affirmative, by every person who maintains that we ought permanently to exclude the natives from high office. 1 have no fears. The path of duty is plain before us: and it is also the path of wisdom, of national prosperity, of national honor.

Source

From Thomas Babington Macaulay, "Speech in Parliament on the Government of India Bill, 10 July 1833," Macaulay, Prose and Poetry, selected by G.M. Young (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1957), pp. 716-18


On Indian Education

We now come to the gist of the matter. We have a fund to be employed as Government shall direct for the intellectual improvement of the people of this country. The simple question is, what is the most useful way of employing it?

All parties seem to be agreed on one point, that the dialects commonly spoken among the natives of this part of India, contain neither literary nor scientific information, and are, moreover, so poor and rude that, until they are enriched from some other quarter, it will not be easy to translate any valuable work into them. It seems to be admitted on all sides, that the intellectual improvement of those classes of the people who have the means of pursuing higher studies can at present be effected only by means of some language not vernacular amongst them.

What then shall that language be? One-half of the Committee maintain that it should be the English. The other half strongly recommend the Arabic and Sanscrit. The whole question seems to me to be, which language is the best worth knowing?

I have no knowledge of either Sanscrit or Arabic.-But I have done what I could to form a correct estimate of their value. I have read translations of the most celebrated Arabic and Sanscrit works. I have conversed both here and at home with men distinguished by their proficiency in the Eastern tongues. I am quite ready to take the Oriental learning at the valuation of the Orientalists themselves. I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia. The intrinsic superiority of the Western literature is, indeed, fully admitted by those members of the Committee who support the Oriental plan of education. (probably the most arrogant statement of the speech)

It will hardly be disputed, I suppose, that the department of literature in which the Eastern writers stand highest is poetry. And I certainly never met with any Orientalist who ventured to maintain that the Arabic and Sanscrit poetry could be compared to that of the great European nations. But when we pass from works of imagination to works in which facts are recorded, and general principles investigated, the superiority of the Europeans becomes absolutely immeasurable. It is, I believe, no exaggeration to say, that all the historical information which has been collected from all the books written in the Sanscrit language is less valuable than what may be found in the most paltry abridgements used at preparatory schools in England. In every branch of physical or moral philosophy, the relative position of the two nations is nearly the same.

How, then, stands the case? We have to educate a people who cannot at present be educated by means of their mother-tongue. We must teach them some foreign language. The claims of our own language it is hardly necessary to recapitulate. It stands preeminent even among the languages of the west. It abounds with works of imagination not inferior to the noblest which Greece has bequeathed to us; with models of every species of eloquence; with historical compositions, which, considered merely as narratives, have seldom been surpassed, and which, considered as vehicles of ethical and political instruction, have never been equalled; with just and lively representations of human life and human nature; with the most profound speculations on metaphysics, morals, government, jurisprudence, and trade; with full and correct information respecting every experimental science which tends to preserve the health, to increase the comfort, or to expand the intellect of man. Whoever knows that language has ready access to all the vast intellectual wealth, which all the wisest nations of the earth have created and hoarded in the course of ninety generations. It may safely be said, that the literature now extant in that language is of far greater value than all the literature which three hundred years ago was extant in all the languages of the world together. Nor is this all. In India, English is the language spoken by the ruling class. It is spoken by the higher class of natives at the seats of Government. It is likely to become the language of commerce throughout the seas of the East. It is the language of two great European communities which are rising, the one in the south of Africa, the other in Australasia; communities which are every year becoming more important, and more closely connected with our Indian empire. Whether we look at the intrinsic value of our literature, or at the particular situation of this country, we shall see the strongest reason to think that, of all foreign tongues, the English tongue is that which would be the most useful to our native subjects.

The question now before us is simply whether, when it is in our power to teach this language, we shall teach languages in which, by universal confession, there are no books on any subject which deserve to be compared to our own; whether, when we can teach European science, we shall teach systems which, by universal confession, whenever they differ from those of Europe, differ for the worse; and whether, when we can patronise sound Philosophy and true History, we shall countenance, at the public expense, medical doctrines, which would disgrace an English farrier [note: a horse shoer] -Astronomy, which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school, History, abounding with kings thirty feet high, and reigns thirty thousand years long, and Geography, made up of seas of treacle and seas of butter.

We are not without experience to guide us. History furnishes several analogous cases, and they all teach the same lesson. There are in modem times, to go no further, two memorable instances of a great impulse given to the mind of a whole society,-of prejudices overthrown,-of knowledge diffused,-of taste purified,-of arts and sciences planted in countries which had recently been ignorant and barbarous.

The first instance to which I refer, is the great revival of letters among the Western nations at the close of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century. At that time almost every thing that was worth reading was contained in the writings of the ancient Greeks and Romans. Had our ancestors acted as the Committee of Public Instruction has hitherto acted; had they neglected the language of Cicero and Tacitus; had they confined their attention to the old dialects of our own island; had they printed nothing and taught nothing at the universities but Chronicles in Anglo-Saxon, and Romances in Norman-French, would England have been what she now is? What the Greek and Latin were to the contemporaries of More and Ascham [note: English humanists of the 16th century] our tongue is to the people of India. The literature of England is now more valuable than that of classical antiquity. I doubt whether the Sanscrit literature be as valuable as that of our Saxon and Norman progenitors. In some departments,-in History, for example, I am certain that it is much less so.

In one point I fully agree with the gentlemen to whose general views I am opposed. I feel with them, that it is impossible for us, with our limited means, to attempt to educate the body of the people. We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect. To that class we may leave it to refine the vernacular dialects of the country, to enrich those dialects with terms of science borrowed from the Western nomenclature, and to render them by degrees fit vehicles for conveying knowledge to the great mass of the population.

Source

From Thomas Babington Macaulay, "Minute of 2 February 1835 on Indian Education," Macaulay, Prose and Poetry, selected by G. M. Young (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1957), pp-721-24,729.


:frown::frown::frown::cry::angry::angry:


link : http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1833macaulay-india.html
 
Last edited:
.
effectively, the culture of our region was corrupted and ultimately led to the present situation because of this mentality of "Lord" Macaulay. Is there any way we can "undo" the damage? who should be held responsible for this terrible blunder that demolished the beautiful structure of this part of the world?

It is akin to destroying a magnificient structure - like the taliban bombing the bamiyan budhas - something like destroying the taj mahal. shame on those people!
 
.
I have no words for this. I was going through history of colonization (for my thesis) and came across this. Sharing with you all. I, for one, am totally heart broke, and ravaged thinking how our culture, language and self esteem were raped.. i have no better word for it. its simple r@pe!

==================================
... The mere extent of empire is not necessarily an advantage. To many governments it has been cumbersome; to some it has been fatal. It will be allowed by every statesman of our time that the prosperity of a community is made up of the prosperity of those who compose the community, and that it is the most childish ambition to covet dominion which adds to no man's comfort or security. To the great trading nation, to the great manufacturing nation, no progress which any portion of the human race can make in knowledge, in taste for the conveniences of life, or in the wealth by which those conveniences are produced, can be matter of indifference. It is scarcely possible to calculate the benefits which we might derive from the diffusion of European civilisation among the vast population of the East. It would be, on the most selfish view of the case, far better for us that the people of India were well governed and independent of us, than ill governed and subject to us; that they were ruled by their own kings, but wearing our broadcloth, and working with our cutlery, than that they were performing their salams to English collectors and English magistrates, but were too ignorant to value, or too poor to buy, English manufactures. To trade with civilised men is infinitely more profitable than to govern savages. That would, indeed, be a doting wisdom, which, in order that India might remain a dependency, would make it an useless and costly dependency, which would keep a hundred millions of men from being our customers in order that they might continue to be our slaves.

Are we to keep the people of India ignorant in order that we may keep them submissive? Or do we think that we can give them knowledge without awakening ambition? Or do we mean to awaken ambition and to provide it with no legitimate vent? Who will answer any of these questions in the affirmative? Yet one of them must be answered in the affirmative, by every person who maintains that we ought permanently to exclude the natives from high office. 1 have no fears. The path of duty is plain before us: and it is also the path of wisdom, of national prosperity, of national honor.

It is plain that many in South Asia - and East Asia, not to mention Africa - are "Macaulay's children". To be honest, the single act of immigration many years ago by my parents made me, too, a child of "Macaulay's".

I am not livid. But I can see why you are - especially since you are likely NA-born and raised - and indignation was how you were educated to feel - how you were supposed to feel. And it's certainly not wrong.

But everything is part of a Plan, at least I believe. As humans, our choices in life are usually between evil and "lesser evils". But there is One who plans Good and can even make Good out of a patently evil situation ...

This Macaulay dude - his picture is right up there in the dictionary beside the phrase "White man's burden". It should not escape you that the part you highlighted and I modified in Bold forms the Anglo-American attitude toward the entire world throughout the 20th century, which was to some degree of precision an Anglo-american Century - one in which they defeated head-on challenges from their cousins on the European mainland (twice and after the second time shaped the cousins more or less to their image), subdued a challenger from the East waving crazy Samurai swords, and then the Soviets - through "ideas".

But make no mistake, my friend. The Anglo-american Empire is but a "tool" as well - a tool for the One who wields it - for His purpose. Far be it from me to claim any proficiency in deciphering the Purposes from, say, 50,000 year old "Star Charts". Plainly, I do not know to what purpose each tool serves except that the purpose is Good for those who believe.

Now looking ahead, are the English Yobs going to "save" the South and East Asians from themselves in the 21st century? Especially when the Yobs' ability to "save" themselves increasingly comes into doubt?

This chapter I watch with some interest - vested interest you might say.

And thanks for posting something that gives occasion to a rewarding detour from the usual jingoistic "news" around here. But the mods should probably move this to a different section for it is not exactly "military history".

:cheers:
 
Last edited:
.
The First thing always been done by 'em against any occupied nation was to cut off their connection/link from their past. So they could easy forget their values /culture,their ideology :undecided:
 
.
effectively, the culture of our region was corrupted and ultimately led to the present situation because of this mentality of "Lord" Macaulay. Is there any way we can "undo" the damage? who should be held responsible for this terrible blunder that demolished the beautiful structure of this part of the world?

It is akin to destroying a magnificient structure - like the taliban bombing the bamiyan budhas - something like destroying the taj mahal. shame on those people!

Its true that Macaulay's motives behind spreading the English language and culture in the sub-continent were to rule and subjugate the people. But I believe culture and history isnt easily suppressed. And culture is only as strong as the people who are a part of it. Learning a foreign language through a foreign system of education doesn't mean that you will lose connection with your own culture. We also owe much of our documented history and archaeological discovereis to foreigners. Sir Hubert Marshall, the one who discovered Harappa ruins and Mcauliff, who wrote a number of books on Sikh history.

By educating Indians (pre-partition) he imparted them tools to fight and demand their own rights. So it wasn't all that bad. Its the so-called Macaulay's children and their English education that enables them to connect with the world easily. If it hadn't been for him and India wouldn't have been able to reach the same heights in the service industry. Language proficiency is what allows us to be at the top in Back-office and IT.

And I do not condone Macaulay's views. They are downright derogatory and racist. Its just that everything has two sides to it, positive and negative.
 
.
Its true that Macaulay's motives behind spreading the English language and culture in the sub-continent were to rule and subjugate the people. But I believe culture and history isnt easily suppressed. And culture is only as strong as the people who are a part of it. Learning a foreign language through a foreign system of education doesn't mean that you will lose connection with your own culture. We also owe much of our documented history and archaeological discovereis to foreigners. Sir Hubert Marshall, the one who discovered Harappa ruins and Mcauliff, who wrote a number of books on Sikh history.

When you go far from your language, how can you read your history books?

How many of Indians/Pakistanis can understand and read/write Sanskrit/Persian???
 
.
my point is -

They had done this on the pretext of "taming" us. In their words "civilizing" us. which in itself is arrogant. even now they are trying to impose their values. I mean, why should the world follow the economic model of "extreme industrialization" even at the loss of natural treasures. The point of the matter is, why do we let them do it again and again.
 
.
When you go far from your language, how can you read your history books?

How many of Indians/Pakistanis can understand and read/write Sanskrit/Persian???

I get your point about understanding our own languages, but I guess you chose the wrong examples.

Well if we think about it-
Persian itself was a foreign language. Brought in and imposed by Mughals. And I am afraid I dont know what people towards north-western india (present pakistan) spoke before Persian.

Sanskrit stopped being spoken by the common people around 13th century. Regional languages took over after that. It was only used by priests and for works of literature. In fact the revival of interest in Sanskrit can be attributed to many foreign linguists who re-discovered Sanskrit and found the origins of many later day Indo-European languages.
 
.
Persian itself was a foreign language. Brought in and imposed by Mughals. And I am afraid I dont know what people towards north-western india (present pakistan) spoke before Persian.

Persian for Muslims. And before that there would be just regional languages.
 
.
my point is -

They had done this on the pretext of "taming" us. In their words "civilizing" us. which in itself is arrogant. even now they are trying to impose their values. I mean, why should the world follow the economic model of "extreme industrialization" even at the loss of natural treasures. The point of the matter is, why do we let them do it again and again.

Bro, and my point is that we cant just blame them. Its a two way traffic. Maybe things were forced upon us during foreign rule, but that isn't the case for the past 60 years. We have to choose a careful mix of foreign and local to take our culture forward.

You are right, extreme industrialization isn't good, especially when it leads to mass-exploitation of natural resources. We CHOSE to follow this model. The world tried communism as well, but it failed miserably.
 
.
Persian for Muslims. And before that there would be just regional languages.

Are you sure? Wouldnt Punjabi, Saraiki and Pashto be counted as more of indigenous languages than Persian?

And I don't think you could make a distinction based on religion. Even for Muslims, I believe Persian was only spoken by the nobility and the intelligentsia. The rest spoke their local languages.
 
.
Are you sure? Wouldnt Punjabi, Saraiki and Pashto be counted as more of indigenous languages than Persian?
And I don't think you could make a distinction based on religion. Even for Muslims, I believe Persian was only spoken by the nobility and the intelligentsia. The rest spoke their local languages.
Pashto, sindhi are very old languages.
but
Persian
because Muslims's Work was in Persian for many years.
 
.
Pashto, sindhi are very old languages.
but
Persian
because Muslims's Work was in Persian for many years.

Yes, but if I am right, Islam was introduced to the northwest by the Arab invasion in Sindh around 700-800 AD. And the Persian speaking, ethnically Mongol-Turks Mughals arrived only in the 15th century. So the Muslim work/literature in the intermittent 700 years could have been either written in the indigenous languages (pashto, Sindhi) or Arabic.

So at the cost of digressing from the topic, my point is that Persian too should be counted as a foreign language, not native to the sub-continent, along-with English and Arabic.

Cheers!
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom