skip to main | skip to sidebar

Sunday Posts
Sunday Posts isn't, and never was, about ideas thought up on idle Sundays. It intended to be, but Sundays never appeared. I always thought in essays. I was a natural with long-winded grand ideas. But, in a holiday-less world and under the watch of a sleepless God, words came to me. Fragmented. Momentary. But, nonetheless, carried the moment.

Setting the Tone

Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the grey twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat. - Theodore Roosevelt

Monday, January 28, 2008

Lord Macaulay's Quote on India
A friend has recently forwarded me a quote from Lord Macaulay's speech in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835. I reproduce the quote below: "I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation." The email requested me to forward me to every indian I know. I was tempted, but there were two oddities about this quote. First, the language, which appeared too modern. Second, this was far too obvious and too cynical for Macaulay, who was an apologist of the empire, and believed in its high moral purpose. The quote was obviously a fraud. I was, however, tempted to check the source of this quote [I take this blog seriously!]. I found this useful article on http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/hinduism/macaulay.html. The article basically says that there is no authoritative source for this quote, except Hindu Nationalist magazines and sources, though this is widely circulated and believed. The author also claims that it is unlikely that such a speech was made, as Macaulay would have been in India on that date. Then I found more information on Macaulay's speech in http://books.google.com/books?

id=0kSMosMLUMwC&pg=PA169&lpg=PA169&dq=lord+macaulay+2nd+february+1835+indi a&source=web&ots=wmjOO95mYR&sig=Q6U0FlzLCJH3Tl21qCOIqva-oy8#PPA174,M1 which told me that Macaulay addressed the parliament on about Indian education. [The date was 10th July 1833] This speech is usually referred together with his famous Minutes on Indian Education, which was indeed dated 2nd February 1835 where he was arguing in favour of using English as the medium of education in India, and made his oft-quoted comment that 'a single shelf of good european library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia'. However, what is overlooked, rather conveniently, is this comment contained the same document: 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. I 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.[http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1833macaulay-india.html] Clearly, Macaulay was saying something directly opposite to what has been quoted as his! There is indeed a clear reason why this distorted quote was invented. This is indeed RSS and its followers, who put words on Macaulay. I now know RSS even referred to English speaking Indians as 'Children of Macaulay'! The quote above, passed on by my trusting friend, is a spoof, RSS trying to interpret what Macaulay might have meant. [I am sure those who did it knew that Macaulay also put Arabic on the same boat as Sanksrit] http://casi.ssc.upenn.edu/india/iit_Prasad2.htm contains another excellent article, which drew my attention to another of famous Macaulay quotes, contained in his Minutes on Education - 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. However, this article also attempts to explain why Macaulay is such a hate figure among the Hindu nationalists. India is one of those countries with a great past and a promising future - and a present made up of unending conflicts between the two. No wonder Lord Macaulay has been invoked again, by email! And, no wonder it is a spoof, suiting some political Indian's view of the world. However, the colonialist that he was, India can thank Lord Macaulay for its modernity. He scripted the Indian Penal Code. He made no convenient adjustment to local religions. He wanted to build an education system secular and scientific, free of age-old prejudices and at par with the Western world. While his comment on Indian and Arabian literature was certainly ignorant, he played his part in building the modern India we are all so proud of. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Note: Since I wrote this post, Macaulay kept coming back to the conversations. I reckon it is only fair to highlight what I have written since, which provides an additional perspective,

perhaps, to this discussion. Macaulay and I Should Britain Apologise? Does Macaulay Matter? Undoing Macaulay: The Case for Inglish From: Supriyo Chaudhuri at 7:31 PM Labels: English, History, India, Indian History, Indianness, Macaulay, Macaulay's Quote 83 comments: Anirudha Joshi said... Thanks Suprio for your views. While Macaulay is blamed for all things that went wrong with English education, RSS gets blamed for all things that are sounding (rightly or wrongly) nationalist. When I think of the British bringing 'world class' English education to India, and creating a 'class' of people who in turn helped the British govern the millions of 'natives', it always reminds me of the then Indian National Congress. It is no surprise that many 'real' leaders in the struggle of independence of the INC either had spent many of their formative years outside India (Naoroji, Aurobindo, Gandhi...) or were strongly against such English education (Tilak, Gokhale...). The advantages of English education are many, but the main disadvantage is that it propagates the inequalities in our society. Contrary to popular belief, only a small fraction of India in 2008 can speak English, and a further fraction actually prefers it. (Going by Census 2001 data on education, my guess for both fractions is a quarter, though I could be overestimating.) Education, jobs and opportunities for selfimprovement go only to this quarter of a quarter. Of course, Macaulay alone can't be blamed for this. Language as a class barrier has existed in India for long. Before English, it was Urdu, and before Urdu it was Sanskrit. An intelligent and thinking person like Macaulay can perhaps be blamed for doing little to bridge the gap. Of course, he was not attempting to bring equality among Indians merely to see how the British can continue to efficiently rule India. Cant let this comment end without mentioning an RSS school in Pune Dnyan Prabodhini. This school teaches the sciences and math in English, social sciences in Hindi and other subjects in Marathi an interesting experiment. Anirudha Joshi

February 28, 2008 sparsha said... (I want to see how long my post stays on this blog) Here we go again!. Another great brilliant british educated mind. And THIS is the result of English education in India that Macaulay gave rise to; A mind that accepts as the final word anything that is given to it from the West. And right here on this blog is the proof. This guy (Suprio Chaudhuri) questions the source of a quote and rightfully so, I would have done the same. But he swallows up large garbs of fecal matter from this link (http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/hinduism/macaulay.html) because it is descending from the behind of a "great western thinker". Presenting it as the authoritative final word on the matter. I read through that article and what I saw was an article that lacks the same credibility, the lack of which, it criticizes. However, let us for the moment, agree with him on this say that quote didn't exist. The rest of the article lacks any meaningful analysis. The author provides justifications for all almost all of the quotes by Macaulay that clearly indicate he was short-sighted. BTW Suprio you need to make up your mind was Macaulay in Parliament or not in 1835 the article you point to says otherwise and the text you refer to says he was. So please get your head out of your rear-end. By the way the abstract says "Koenraad Elst discovers through a wrong quotation attributed to Lord Macaulay how right the anglicizer of Indian culture was, or at least how right his intentions were, subjectively." Any historian (Well, a sane one) would agree that the author needs to make up his mind first, those two things can't be true at the same time. Reading the very passages by Macaulay provide a very clear picture of the man. Here's one of the quotes. "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. A single shelf of a good European library is worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia. It is, I believe, no exaggeration to say, that all the historical information which has been collected from all the books written may be found in the most paltry abridgments used at preparatory schools in England."

So let's see here. He doesn't know any Indian languages has read translations of most celebrated works (which are ...???) from men distinguished for their proficiency (who are ...???). And works better than these (which are ...???) are being taught at english preparatory schools. Really ??? (So who's imgination is more crazier RSS or Macaulay?) The author of the aricle says "If this seems arrogant on Macaulay's part, we must consider that he merely wanted to give India the shock treatment of exposure to more advanced foreign influences which England itself had received to its own benefit a few centuries earlier" So lets see again. This guy knows what Macaulay was thinking (now that's an advanced brain for sure). Advanced foreign influence? Advanced in what way? England was influenced by who and benefitted in what way? These are the signs of a lizard brain. I don't know about the quote that the RSS supposedly cooked up. If there is indeed such a quote I have no doubt that the british would have destroyed it before it gets public. People who rewarded the The Butcher of Amritsar can be expected to do nothing better. But the reality of the British did do has been well summarized in this quote. What they did create was a class of people like Suprio Chaudhuri who are proud of Macaulay, Dyer (the Butcher of Amristar) (I'm sure he will come up with some equally retarded justification of how the Butcher enlightened the Indians by a massacre) and also the fact that our treasures are in the hands of the British today (from the Kohinoor to the peacock throne). Talking of software I don't know if that Macaulite guy knows what he is talking about but computers are not language specific and sanskrit is the most suitable for interpretation. Oh and like Suprio I didn't pull this out of of my behind, I am a Computer Scientist, I know Sanskrit and know what I'm talking about. And don't know if you know this but numbers were invented by Indians (the pre-british enlightened Indians so don't claim you're one of them) and THAT is the basis of anything and everything scientific (not english unfortunately). Without that the western world would still have been in the stoneage drawing leaves and fish to count. BTW two of your links are by the same guy and have more or less the same content. Your "enlightened" ming probably didn't catch it. June 30, 2008 Supriyo Chaudhuri said... I am impressed, Sparsha, that I touched a raw nerve here. However, you did not answer the key question that I sought an answer to : Did Macaulay make the quote which I claimed as spoof?

I make no pretense to be a historian. I gave out the sources of my observations, and did not claim any authenticity beyond that. All I sought to answer was, could Macaulay have made those comments. Apparently not, as you mail proves again. You portray Macaulay as a man with limited education, not an enlightened admirer of India. That makes it very unlikely that he could have made the comments attributed as his, in Parliament, where he admires India and makes a cynical plot. I love India as much as anyone does. However, I never thought my love for my country needs to be expressed in terms of rejection of all other civilization and knowledge. I shall state my point yet again - if Macaulay chose to teach English to Indians, he did good, even if inadvertantly. In this context, I remember this dinner time conversation with a British colleague of mine. He said, he 'did not need to learn another language, as the world has learnt English'. I told him that the power in the world remains with the curious, and it is time that he wakes up and sends his children to learn Chinese. Without trying to get into Macaulay's mind, he contributed in laying the foundations, in some way, of the India we are proud of. We are proud of India not because Sankskrit is the language that computers understand, or because we created the caste system long before others started talking about 'specialisms'. We are proud of India because we have an inclusive culture, which defeated every invading army in absorbing them in itself. I am not the one to be ashamed of acknowledging Macaulay's role, and feel a bit happy that we have finally beaten him in his own game. June 30, 2008 Abhay Karnataki said... Obviously the foreign records will say what preserves their image. Modernity!?? you call this modernity? having to converse in a foreign language in place of the national language? If you go to Germany, you will see nothing but German signboards, people speaking their mother-tounge. Whether the exact words are true or not, what is content in it has been the essential strategy of British rulers. They Did Destroy the roots, and converted the intellectuals in this country into clerks. Even today that unfortunate trend is seen in terms of the way people chose the careers, study for marks in the exams rather than knowledge, and so much lack of ingenuity or originality. They did give the image to the middle class here that whatever is foreign is good, and that trend is still seen in teenagers drinking colas and wearing jeans in hot summer of Mumbai! Self pride of the Indians has been bashed by these education systems which were channeled for having a smooth functioning of TheiR rule on us, rather than our development.

As a result of this the youth in Rural India have started moving to Cities, they are not getting employment there and leading to crimes. Instead of intellectualising the things and branding it on politics, let's learn the true history of India, which was obviously twisted and presented to us, and deepen our roots. Francois Gautier would be a good starting point to know about the History of India. December 10, 2008 abcd said... to everyone who opposed the guy, supriyo: friends the last passage of the macaulay's speech syas, "We will create a generation which will be indian by blood and colour and british by test, opinions,culture, intellect and morals". this guy supriyo belongs to that generation. he is the brainchild of macaulay. he is too westernized to identify the difference between the intentions and the views of macaulay. so dont waste your time in posting comment to someone like him. lets WORK together to have a new generation which will be answer to the threat by this BRAINCHILD geneeration. to the great supriyo: I would suggest you to first know what indian culture was prior to british invasion and what it is now. if you could find the difference, you will get the answer February 15, 2009 Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Hello and thanks for your comments. I have my views on Indian culture as you have yours. However, the point here is whether Macaulay did make those comments, and whether making up the comment is the best way to talk about our history, pre- or postBritish rule. Besides, the content of the made-up comment was very different from what was actually said. What Macaulay said reflects his ignorance and purpose of creating an efficient administration from his point of view, not unlike how a corporate manager will think today, whatever the moral aspect of such action. However, the 'made up' comment project a golden past for India, which is essentially anomolous to what you will think of India under Muslim rule [perhaps], and then sets out to paint the British designs on a different light. Let me ask you this: Do you think that when Macaulay was seeing India - in 1832 - India was really a land without poverty? February 16, 2009 Anonymous said...

I dont know what Englsh education has brought to India, a million of coolies working for a petty money!!! LOL, varnashrama dharma was nectar March 03, 2009 Anonymous said... please go to url http://www.languageinindia.com/april2003/macaulay.html March 24, 2009 Pranjal said... Pragmaticaly . what Macaulay said or did not say ages ago matters nothing in the present day context .What matters is , that WE INDIANS , today stand on the thrashold of THE NEW WORLD , where scripts have started being written . And the nations which harmoniously amalgamate the principles of nature will be rich and powerful to lead this NEW WORLD .What we need to brood over at this hour is that do we have THAT vision , WISDOM , self respect , dicipline, honesty , commitement , perseverance and leadership which can deliver what we aspire !! June 09, 2009 Suresh said... I like to thank Supriyo for pointing out how some misguided people use the Internet to mislead others with lies and false rumours. Whoever is into this type of illegitimate activity should be taken to task and prosecuted. This really underscores the need to realize that whatever is printed (or on the Internet)may not be true at all. July 23, 2009

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Thanks for your kind comments, Suresh. Yes, indeed, Internet as a medium is great if one wants to spread false information, and there will always be those who would want to take advantage. Remember, a false quote like this can fool almost everyone. I saw Amitabh Bachchan quoting these words on his blog, commenting what a great country India was. I also had someone, who believed ernestly that Maculay indeed said these words, stated that he saw these words on a train compartment being printed by the Ministry of HRD. Without making the pretence of knowing the actual historical fact, I must say that the quote struck me as odd because of its modern language and open cynicism. As far as the Early Victorian public speaking is concerned, you will always find an unfailing correctness in these matters, which was missing here. July 24, 2009

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... As I studied Macaulay more, I came across this observation he made in his seminal essay on Robert Clive. I quote here as this is close to the spoof, in a sense, and Macaulay was praising Indians [though he was actually talking about British valor]: "The people of India, when we subdued them, were ten times as numerous as the Americans whom the Spaniards vanquished, and were at the same time quite as highly civilised as the victorious Spaniards. They had reared cities larger and fairer than Saragossa or Toledo, and buildings more beautiful and costly than the cathedral of Seville. They could show bankers richer than the richest firms of Barcelona or Cadiz, viceroys whose splendour far surpassed that of Ferdinand the Catholic, myriads of cavalry and long trains of artillery which would have astonished the Great Captain. It might have been expected, that every Englishman who takes any interest in any part of history would be curious to know how a handful of his countrymen, separated from their home by an immense ocean, subjugated, in the course of a few years, one of the greatest empires in the world. Yet, unless we greatly err, this subject is, to most readers, not only insipid, but positively distasteful." July 31, 2009

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... And this: "Of the provinces which had been subject to the house of Tamerlane, the wealthiest was Bengal. No part of India possessed such natural advantages both for agriculture and for commerce. The Ganges, rushing through a hundred channels to the sea, has formed a vast plain of rich mould which, even under the tropical sky, rivals the verdure of an English April. The rice-fields yield an increase such as is elsewhere unknown. Spices, sugar, vegetable oils, are produced with marvellous exuberance. The rivers afford an inexhaustible supply of fish. The desolate islands along the sea-coast, overgrown by noxious vegetation, and swarming with deer and tigers, supply the cultivated districts with abundance of salt. The great stream which fertilises the soil is, at the same time, the chief highway of Eastern commerce. On its banks, and on those of its tributary waters, are the wealthiest marts, the most splendid capitals, and the most sacred shrines of India. The tyranny of man had for ages struggled in vain against the overflowing bounty of nature. In spite of the Mussulman despot and of the Mahratta freebooter, Bengal was known through the East as the garden of Eden, as the rich kingdom. Its population multiplied exceedingly. Distant provinces were nourished from the overflowing of its granaries; and the noble ladies of London and Paris were clothed in the delicate produce of its looms. The race by whom this rich tract was peopled, enervated by a soft climate and accustomed to peaceful employments, bore the same relation to other Asiatics which the Asiatics generally bear to the bold and energetic children of Europe."

July 31, 2009 Anonymous said... Very useful topic! even I am looking into your blog cuz I jus came across this mail from one of my friend! Our people are mixing intellect and emotion...that is the issue! If it is a misquote ...let us accept that until we get a proof that it is authentic(the so-called Macualay's address)! Point 1.Anirudh has tried his best to find the authenticity of the spoof mail and nothing beyond that. 2.why do we have to blame him and make personal remarks on him..shows our immaturity to handle things intellectually. 3.Do we all agree that India was so wealthy before british? check the historical data of famines in India..caste based education...caste discrimination..that still prevails please please please talk sensibly 4.This spoof is so immature that it talks about India during Colony rule(already they were ruling us) 5.We are quoting Germany...do we have a single language to talk..pls accept the reality. and above all...let us all stop dicriminating people based on the place they live in.Is it a sin living in UK? I don't have a second opinion on working towards prosperity for India and to contribute my part for a wealthy,healthy and strong India. Jai hind! regards, Kishore INDIA bloorockz@gmail.com October 23, 2009 Anonymous said... sorry,i misquoted :) Anirudh for Suprio ! Thanks Suprio for your work! I sincerely appreciate your efforts! regards, Kishore October 23, 2009

Supriyo Chaudhuri said...

Many thanks, Kishore, for your kind comments. November 06, 2009 Anonymous said... It is not important that what Macaulay said in 1830's , Its important to think what will happen if tomorrow all of a sudden if we declare Japanese as medium of instruction. I know that it is not possible in single day may be over a period of time its possible. we never know the consequences of it, atleast we humans cant predict it.one result could be literacy rate could increase or decrease or be the same. with respect to me I learnt german last year , I hate to go classes (my age is 26) ,i hated the teacher who did no harm to me, I started bunking classes.but finally somehow passsed A1 course in german for sake of my job.I am an engineer in automobile field , i used to update myself on automobile field but I felt that for 4 months during the german classes i spent time learning new language and less time about latest update in my field. atleast by 50% because i was learning new things like eating ,sleeping,running all in german lang.which i learn long before at the age of 5-7. think what will happen to a 5 year old (indian)kid if we ask him to suddenly learn russian language even with the best teacher in the world the kid will fail or just pass may be! finally result is kid remains less educated compared to another kid who learns in his mother tounge. if we consider a whole nation instead of that kid then there are possiblities for drop in the literacy rate by almost 40-50%.Now we know Macaulay's or British's noble intention behind introducing english as a medium of instruction.if they did not know this will cause ill effects to indians then they are the dumbest fools in the whole world ,but they are not dumb but cruel sorry the most cruel ever ! this is just only one sction from them,there are a lot more to tell.taking this as a lesson we should convert all the konwledge in the world into language known to us (globalisation), then of course it is for sure only the best leads the race - it wil be us for sure. Rgds KISHORE. December 06, 2009

Astroyogi said... I took 30 valuable minutes to scan the blog, to realize that years have been wasted on discussing the past. Take my word, It has screwed your present and shall screw the future. Think of what you should do now and not what should have been done as you have no control over the past events. For everybodies sake, stop such irrelevant blogging. With great power of the internet comes great responsibility....

PLEASE, use your time effectively. I will no longer chat with you.... Thanks December 23, 2009

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Hi Thanks for taking time to read and leaving the comment anyway. I must admit I read your blog afterwards and understand that we have a disagreement of different kind - that of whether Internet publishing does any good. There is of course no denying of the fact that most of what we write on our blogs are not credentialled, professional writing. But, then, here is what I think: Most of the words which get published in the print media, or conveyed in the classroom are not credentialled either. I remember someone from the past who spent his life publishing books debunking Galileo's theory and claiming that the Sun goes around the earth. I have seen people using history classes to teach that Lord Ram was born in that precise site in Ayodhya. And, obviously, the spoof comment, which was absurd not just in its content, but in its language and context altogether, did its round in print media before anyone circulated it on the Internet. So, here is my argument: Internet publishing allows more people to participate in creation and validation of existing knowledge. Yes, one needs to know how to validate available information, but that has nothing to do with Internet publishing or amateur blogging. This comment above was published in journals, was displayed in Ministry of HRD placards, quoted by celebrities and used in classrooms in famous schools, but it is still a spoof: Macaulay never said that. So, credentialling remains important with or without Internet. And, I think bloggers collectively are doing a service to the society by flipping the power balance between those who could publish and those who could not, and by building a more transparent world. Warm Regards, Supriyo December 23, 2009 Anonymous said...

OUR INDIA IS GREAT-whether some one realises or not. It was looted by many rulers,including the BRITISH. Modern Education,English language introduced during the BRITISH,helped INDIANS go GLOBAL, which is a fact. February 06, 2010

Mandar Shinde said... Thanks Supriyo, for pointing this out! The concern here is not, whether to support Lord Macaulay or not. The concern is why our people need to fake the past to prove that we are (or were) the best?? We invented zero, ok...we were masters in astrology, ok....our kings were brave enough to rule the world, okay okay... We are proud of all this; but, at the same time, we want to move forward. The people creating such spoof seem to be strong believers of Macaulay, as they think his quotes are so important even today. That's the reason why they want to fake his statements to misguide our people. Why don't these people work hard enough to bring back the old golden days (as they always refer to), instead of spreading such useless rumors. Some time ago, I received a 'Real' live painting of Shivaji Maharaj, through chain mails. (I can't believe Shivaji was a kind of person who would sit in front of a painter for hours to get his pic made!) How the picture being 'real' or not is going to change fate of his followers today? Still, as it is a sentimental call to our 'cultured, religious and emotional' population, such mails keep going, cleverly dodging the brains of all concerned. The moment you put a question on such intentions (in the largest democratic and secular nation), you are labeled as anti-Indian, anti-religion, pro-British, westernized, etc. Time to introspect? Mandar February 09, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Thanks, Mandar, for your kind words. You are indeed right in pointing out that as a nation, we should not need to invent our past. Someone said India is an adolescent nation, with all the energies, insecurities and ambivalences that come with such a period in life. It indeed strikes as true, when we see such efforts. However, it is time to grow up, without doubt.

February 09, 2010

Suddhasheel Bharatiya GHOSH said... Hi, Thanks for such a nice article. I clicked on this blog with an open mind and found it to be interesting. I received a mail too, a couple of times. I would request the readers to note the following: (a) The scanned copy does appear old (can be done by any Image Editing s/w e.g. GIMP) (b) The paper uses a modern Tamizh (Tamil) font. (c) The paper uses ARIAL font, whereas the font prevalent in the British period was the Times. It indeed appears to me as a spoof. Regards Suddhasheel February 25, 2010 Anonymous said... you know,.....it doesn't matter whether or not Macaulay said that above mentioned quote. Point is, he and the British definitely 'did' it - that was their policy and objective. It was done, irrespective of the authenticity of the quote. And so it follows that we consider that we have become what they wanted us to become and its ok to hate the whole lot...... March 11, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... I disagree that it does not matter whether Macaulay said this or not, and whether we can just blame the British for 'doing it' and be satisfied by hating 'them'. The deeper issue reflected in this fabricated quote of Macaulay is exactly that: We are unable to take the responsibility of our plight and we are looking for someone to blame.

We were alright just around 1830s, as the quote claim, though variably we shall claim that the muslims ruined us too. And, the British 'did it', as if we had no controls over our own destiny. I often wonder how the British dominated us for so long, and was tempted to buy the version promoted by Anglo-Saxon historians: This is because they had superior technology, a more matured system of governance and the will and resolve required. But then, the roots of our subserviance lie more in us than outside us. It starts with denial, as we see in this quote, that we had a case to answer ourselves. It encompasses the deep divisions of our society, where with caste, class and language, we tend to leave out our citizens from the privileges of freedom and modern life. We hid our head in sand, and kept blaming outsiders, from Mughal to Macaulay, from Curzon to Pakistan, for everything that we get wrong. I took issues with this mis-quote, and the comments thereafter, because I believed it is time for us to grow up, accept responsibility for our own failings and to start to build a new, inclusive, future. March 11, 2010 Sanket said... ON MACAULAY AND INDIAN CIVILISATION I read your blogs and wish to share my thoughts. I think Macaulay is not the issue. Macaulay wouldnt have been there had India not been subjugated. The very fact that India was subjugated proves that Indian civilisation had reached its decadence. The seat of power had shifted to the European nations and hence India would have learnt English, Macaulay or no Macaulay. Here is what Swami Vivekananda had to say about education system prevalent during British regime; (Taken from My India, the India eternal written by Swami Vivekananda.) It (present university system) is almost wholly one of defects. Why, it is nothing but a perfect machine for turning out clerks. I would even thank my stars if that were all. But no! See how men are becoming destitute of Shraddha and faith. They assert that the Geeta is only an interpolation, and that the Vedas are but rustic songs! The education that you are getting now has some good points, but it has a tremendous disadvantage which is so great that the good things are all weighed down. In the first place it is not man making education. A negative education or any training that is based on negation is worse than death. The child is taken to school, and the first thing he learns is that his father is a fool, the second thing that his grandfather is a lunatic, the third thing that all his teachers are hypocrites, the fourth that all the sacred books are lies! By the time he is sixteen he is a mass of negation and boneless. Swami Vivekananda was in the favour of education that liberated mankind from any kind

of subjugation. He was for education that helped man realise himself. Swami Vivekananda however stressed upon learning English. Why? Because he knew that the seat of power and learning had shifted its place from India to Europe (& America). Ancient India was the centre of power and learning. When the Takshashila University was established thousands of years ago in India, had not the foreigners travelled miles to India to learn the subtle Indian sciences? There were many who learned Sanskrit and sciences in Takshashila and went back to their lands happy and erudite. But now it is we who travel to universities like MIT, Stanford etc to pursue higher studies. This is because the seat of power and learning, as mentioned earlier, has shifted to the western countries. Macaulay did not do anything great by anglicising India. He did what was necessary to maintain their hold over India. Again, as the west was in power at that time, India was bound to learn English. Macaulay was merely an instrument in making India learn English. As swami Vivekananda mentions, western education has done more harm and was necessary to keep India subjugated. In fact, during the time the British ruled India, they have done more harm than good. I do not know whether it was Macaulay who quoted all that on India. But it was right in its context. The British education system did have a tremendous effect on Indian social structure and the effect was not a good one. The seeds of this subservience of India were however sowed much earlier, even before the Islamic conquests of India. The seeds were sown the moment Indias upper classes began to exploit the so called lower classes. If you study India and Hinduism thoroughly, you will realise that the Vedas have been misinterpreted and not understood properly. Vedas never propagated the exploitation of masses on the basis of caste. It was a result of disintegration of Hinduism over the ages. Bigger they are, harder they fall is a well known quote. It can be applied to India too. We were a great nation and we fell harder. It is not wise to cogitate on Indias past and argue over it. As we are not in the seat of power today, we should be humbled and learn whatever the west has to teach us without forgetting our values and culture. When we reach the top, the world will follow us again. As of now, we should think of rising from the ashes (of this great ancient Indian civilisation) and soar like the phoenix. March 16, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Sanket Thank you for your kind and insightful comments. I agree wholeheartedly with your view that we must look inside and find the reasons for our subjugation. The decline, as you rightly point out, started with the establishment of a rigidly stratified society in late Vedic ages, which limited social mobility, meritocracy and innovativeness. India was overrun by invaders because our once mighty civilization soon fallen backwards in terms of technological innovation, and we were too divided to resist an invading army.

So, as you say, with or without Macaulay, we would have landed where we are. And, I also agree with you that some kind of revival is under way, and we should hope to regain our 'rightful' place in the world in the coming days. But I shall stop at this point and also mention two areas where our views diverge. First, I think the ghosts of our past divisions still persist, even if they have taken on new forms. We still discriminate heavily against people who have to do physical work. Every one wants to be a manager, Narayana Murthy lamented, and said we are not a nation of doers. I am optimistic about India, but think we have to do better to bring everyone to party. Second, since the day I wrote this post, I started thinking deeply about us and them business. I do think with technology and social innovation, we are moving into a world of post-national identities. It is not about subjugating 'them' to get even, but this is time for us to emerge morally superior, not be trapped in the dated nationalist thinking which is becoming a thing of the past. March 16, 2010 Sanket said... You are right in saying that the ghosts of our pasts are still lingering around. I understand exactly what you mean. Our views are essentially the same, I don't see where they diverge. Swami Vivekananda had said in the same book that; "Human society is in turn governed by the four castes- the priests, the soldiers, the traders, and the laborers. Each state has its glories as well as its defects. When the priest (Brahmin) rules, there is a tremendous exclusiveness on hereditary grounds; The military (Kshatriya) rule is tyrannical and cruel, but they are not exclusive; and during that period arts and social culture attain their height. The commercial (Vaishya) rule comes next. It is awful in its silent crushing and blood sucking power. Its advantage is, as the trader himself goes everywhere, he is a good disseminator of ideas collected during the previous states. They are still less exclusive than the military, but the culture begins to decay. Last will come the laborer (Sudra)rule. Its advantages will be the distribution of physical comforts - its disadvantages,(perhaps) lowering of culture. There will be great distribution of ordinary education, but extraordinary geniuses will be less and less.... Yet the first three have had their day. Now is the time for the last - they must have it none can resist it. A time will come when there will be the rising of the sudra class, with their sudra-hood; that is to say, not like that as at present, when the sudras are becoming great by acquiring the characteristic qualities of the vaishya or the Kshatriya,...the sudras of every country, with their inborn sudra nature and habits - not becoming in essence vaishya or kshatriya, but remaining as sudras - will gain absolute supremacy in every society. The first glow of the dawn of this new power has already begun to break slowly upon the western world,

and the thoughtful are at their wits end to reflect upon the final issue of this fresh phenomenon. Socialism, Anarchism, Nihilism, and other like sects are the vanguard of the social revolution that is to follow." Please note: Swami Vivekananda does not classify the castes on the basis of their birth (nor do the Vedas), but on the basis of their occupation. Brahmins are the thinkers, Kshatriyas are the warriors, Vaisyas are the traders and Sudras are the working class. So, in time the working class is bound to come up. We cannot stop it for it is the law of nature. The discrimination of the working class that exists in India today will cease in time. There are many factors which influence this, our multi-party democracy too being a factor. The disadvantage of such kind of governance is that things move really slow and development too takes its own time. I also agree with your point of 'not subjugating the western world to get even with them'. In fact, India has never subjugated any country in the past. India has influenced many countries with her culture and philosophy without having to send a single soldier beyond her borders. When India reaches the top, the rest of the world will follow her naturally, without her having to intimidate anyone. March 17, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Hi Well, I see that the views don't diverge. Since I stumbled upon Macaulay and the argument that followed, I thought more deeply about caste. I grew up in a deeply religious family in Kolkata, and we had to put Swami Vivekananda's photos on the first pages of our school exercise books and start everyday lessons talking about him. So, I took naturually to his views of caste, that as a common sense system of specialization or division of labour. The hereditary nature of it definitely seemed like an anomaly, but was explained away - in school - by the common sense view that a doctor's son is more likely to be a doctor, and a police officer's son is more likely to join the force. But, later, when I travelled across India for work and met people from various backgrounds, I realized the other side of caste. I understood, first hand, how demeaning being born in a lower caste can be. Besides, the common sense aspect of caste as a division of labour disappears when you see that it is actually a hierarchy. Suddenly, the whole system appears to be a dated edifice of a bygone era. The problem is that in modern India, for the sake of affirmative action [which was surely necessary at the time of Independence], we have institutionalized caste. I feel we should have gone the opposite way. We should have forced an extreme secularization like France, where it is forbidden to mention religion in CVs or elsewhere. We should banish

caste altogether as a part of social identity, make it illegal to ask about caste, to make it a criteria for marriages, for sale or renting of houses etc. I would add religion to that list too, and I could, would have recommended adding linguistic identity in the list too. You will say that it sounds a bit utopian, but think, it was almost impossible for France to adopt such policies too. We need a sort of a social revolution, without which we can not move to the next step in the ladder. Supriyo March 17, 2010 Sanket said... Hi, Well, you are right in saying that the government of India should not have institutionalised caste during independence. But I do not see the requirement of totally abolishing the caste system. I agree with you on a few points but differ in the course of action that aught to have been followed. Let me make myself clear; The caste system was never meant to be a hierarchy in the first place. As I had mentioned in my earlier blog, the class system was misinterpreted by the upper classes. The caste system is in fact a perfect division of labour. This caste system holds good in every era. (Please do not mistake me to be an advocator of the caste system that is present in India today. My views are pertaining to the classification of caste system on the basis of occupation and not on the basis of birth. This issue is very subtle, sensitive and easily misunderstood.) The scientists of todays world are the Brahmins for they are the ones who look after material development of mankind. Teachers, professors who share their knowledge are also Brahmins irrespective of their birth. A Brahmin must also look after the spiritual development of mankind. Hence, Brahmin class also includes priests, sages and others who genuinely look after the spiritual aspects. The people employed in the armed forces are the Kshatriyas of today for they defend our borders. This class will also include the leaders who lead the nation, the policy makers and all those who keep wheel of governance turning. Todays Vaisyas are the entrepreneurs and industrialists who keep money flowing and look after the prosperity of the nation. Sudras will be those who work for these entrepreneurs or offer services to any of the other classes. The workers, office goers, and neglected masses will fall in this category. Thus, majority of the world falls in this category. Purusha-sookatam, a Vedic hymn explains how the four castes were created with the creation of the universe. The caste system is so perfect that no individual falls beyond these four classes. Every person can be classified into one of these four castes depending on their occupation. So, the caste is actually an integral part of the world. As long as the world exists, the four castes will continue to exist. The caste system in a sense can never be separated from the world. Unfortunately, the castes became associated with birth. The

evil which grew out of this association (of caste to birth) was horrendous and its ill effects are visible even today. I think things would improve if people realise this nature of caste. People of India should understand what was actually meant by the caste system of the Vedas. Once this realisation dawns upon them, there will be no more struggle on the basis of caste. The government of India, intelligentsia and the holy spiritual leaders of India should make conscious efforts in this direction. When people realise that caste has nothing to do with birth, they will leave the futile struggle of caste. I however agree with you that caste should not be mentioned on CV, Resumes or during admissions to schools and colleges. Caste (on the basis of birth) should never be a criterion for jobs, promotions or admissions to colleges. These should be provided on the basis of merit. But there are many poor people in India who cannot afford education for their children. Reservations should be meant for such economically stressed people and never on the basis of caste. (cont. on the next blog...I couldn't finish within the character limitation) March 17, 2010 Sanket said... Now, the question of language remains. I am basically a south Indian, living in the state of Maharashtra. My mother tongue is Kannada. But I am more proficient in Marathi. I also know Hindi. I have travelled to Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerela, West Bengal, Himachal Pradesh and many other Indian states. What I observed from my travels was that in spite of different languages, India is essentially one in spirit. We have the temples of the same gods and goddesses in every state. Lord Krishna is present in innumerable temples across the length and breadth of the country irrespective of the region and language. You have songs praising the exploits of Lord Krishna in almost every Indian language. It is the same goddess Parvati, who is worshipped as Meenakshi Amman in Tamil Nadu, as Durga in Bengal and as Amba in Maharashtra. Numerous states, languages, dialects and attires; yet we all celebrate the Indian festivals with equal enthusiasm and gaiety. Where is the language barrier? We are one. It is only the tongues we speak are different. All tongues are equally sweet and rich. I enjoy Bhajans on Krishna in all 3 Indian languages (kannada, Hindi and Marathi) I know equally. Language will never be an impediment to Indias progress. The people of India have to realise that in spite of the differences in languages and attires, they are one in spirit. The day this realisation comes, nothing can stop India from achieving what it wills. So, I think that all the languages of India should be retained. They are all full of sweetness and joy. Dont you remember the line from Vande Mataram describing India as speaker of sweet languages (sumadhura Bhashini)? The many languages of India are her many souls. They add splendour, colour and pride to India. Where in the whole world will you find a country such as this, so different in tongues, attires and yet so united in spirit and at heart? I have realised all this on account of my travelling and on great deal of introspection. In

time, rest of India will also realise the same. India only needs to wait until the time is right. March 17, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Hi Interesting points, and I am enjoying this conversation. I agree with most of what you say. And, my experiences were similar - and travel was a great education experience for me too. I feel the deep Indianness and proud of it too. On the caste system, I understand what you are saying, but you know that the hereditary nature of it is ingrained in it now. So is the idea that some work is better than others. I grew up in India, but then lived abroad for a number of years. One of the things I noticed, and something I think we need to work upon, is how little physical work we do ourselves. You may say this is because in India, labour is cheap and plentiful, but I know this is a deeply ingrained attitude. I was trying to set up an office in India a couple of years back, and expected my colleagues to make their own tea/ coffee instead of employing a person to do it for them. To my surprise, some senior managers took this as an insult, and 'a cheap way to control costs', whereas I thought this gave me flexibility and independence [and a very normal thing to do in my office in England]. You may say that this is not what caste system was about, and you are possibly right: But you know the system has become an oppressive, hereditary system through the centuries of practise and abuse by the privileged classes. These prejudices are so ingrained in the whole system of caste, we have no choice but to start afresh. Supriyo March 17, 2010 Sanket said... Yes, we need to begin afresh. But it has to be in such a manner that the culture and traditions of India are not harmed. Indians do have an attitude problem as far as work is concerned. They consider some kind of work as way too inferior to be performed by them as you correctly said. The Chalta Hai attitude is another similar kind of problem that has a negative impact on our progress. I think it is because of the lethargy induced by the lack of momentum. India, that glorious India, reduced to shambles due years of subservience and slavery, has lost its original momentum and attitude. When the momentum picks up, these problems should vanish. It is only a matter of time when such small impediments will be overcome.

We have the Vedas. We have a distinct spirituality and philosophy. These are the eternal guides and lamp posts on the path that India will undertake in the future. They cannot be scrapped as mere songs or figment of imagination for it was because those that India could sustain its original identity in spite of many invasions. It was because of the very nature of Hinduism that all the invaders were absorbed and yet India could maintain its identity. Now, if we try to alter this social fabric of India under the pretext of renaissance, then India will loose its identity and will crumble. We cannot risk India blindly imitating the west and loose its originality. No, we should learn from the west all that is good and proceed our own way, shaping our own future, absorbing the western culture and yet retaining our own as India has been doing in the past. The task that lies ahead of India is very tough indeed. But it is not impossible. India has already started on its journey. This journey will be obviously tiring and there will be obstacles. But one doesnt stop because of obstacles. One can achieve success only after a thousand trepidations. I am sure that no matter what obstacles arise, India will fight and emerge as a more powerful nation. As Swamiji says; "Arise, Awake and stop not until the goal is reached!" March 17, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Sanket You are right - India has to find its own path. And that path is unlikely to be one following the West, not just because we are culturally different, our context of development is also different. Take, for example, the issue of environment: We can't just copy the industrial revolution model and build smoke-spewing factories, we must do this in an environmentally conscious way. So, the path we take must be designed anew, based on our culture and consciousness, but also taking into account the realities of the modern world. I am respectful of India's tradition, but we must critically approach all aspects of our past. Vedas to me represent a deep philosophical view of life, an unique way of approaching our lives and morality. While we must learn from it and try to live its teachings in our lives, I would not want to search for all answers in it, because they were products of their times. Do not take this as a sign of disrespect though. Far from it, I just think modern life demands us to reconcile tradition and culture with the modern challenges, but one must take a dynamic view of life. I think the challenge in India is to get this in right balance. This is why illusions about our past, exemplified in this spoof quote of Macaulay, do not help. We must approach our future with a practical, truthful and balanced perspective about our past. Supriyo

March 17, 2010 John Doe said... I for one find it very offensive that these so called defenders of India need to use a lie to show our country in a good light. These are the kind of people who, in my opinion, are responsible for many of the ills we are facing today. When the British came to India, we were in a mess. When they left, we were still in a mess, albeit a different one. And today we are still in an unenviable situation. Yes many things are changing for the good. Many things are also changing for the bad. We cannot ignore our traditions and culture. They contain a lot of things that we need to learn from and cherish. We also cannot bury our heads ostrich-like in false visions of past glory. There were eras in our history when we were the most progressive nation in the world. However the main reason we lost the so called 'greatness race' was because at some stage in our history we also lost the ability to learn. To absorb knowledge from around the world. We believed (rightly) that we were the best and the rest of the world had nothing to offer (wrongly). I read a translation of Al Biruni's book on India in which he describes the country and its people as he found it. This was in the 10th or 11th Century. Every page is dripping with regret, that a civilisation once so great had become decadent. My suggestion to all those who claim to love our country's past - read its history. March 30, 2010 Lavneet said... Those who are opposed to English in India should either stop using english for communication, internet, postings on blogs, chatting and leave their jobs that necessitate using English in any form. Stop sending their kids to schools that have English as subject or medium. (One way to easily do that is to go to China and live there). or, stop criticising English/Western languages and cultures. Who is asking us to follow those? Did Macaulay asked us to do so? Did they teach us how to follow their culture? We do it by ourselves! And, what about our own culture? Killing female unborn babies, disallowing women/different cast people from visiting places of worships, starting the day with pooja and doing corruption whole day,chanting hymns on loudspeakers as if God is deaf,throwing every conceivable law and common sense to winds while driving,ok to prepare fake passports,ration cards, below poverty line cards, licenses, supplying chemical mixed fake milk to people,putting in every conceivable idea to

practice to evade tax...all this was taught to us by Macaualy? Look back into our rotten souls. This cry of culture is a saving grace that we all need to hide the most crooked people that we've become. If you want to change something, change these things in you and not English/Western culture. May 07, 2010

Mandar Shinde said... Very well said, Lavneet! Most of these cultural rituals were created to distract common people from main issues and ideas. Once you are free from following all these, you get ample time and energy to think and reason. Until you are busy following age-old rituals and beliefs (mostly out of fear and lack of knowledge), how would you look beyond obvious? The whole Macaulay story has been cooked up (like many others), just to appeal people's sentiments and keep them engaged in worthless arguments and false selfpride, while the real issues go unattended at all! May 07, 2010 Antubarwa said... Two comments (1) When I read this alleged quote of MacCaulay, I can not remember when and where, I immediately thought of it as bogus (at least part of it). My conjecture was based on (a) Not finding a begger at any given time in India, even in the past is hard to believe (what about the sandhus and yogis who live by begging) and (b) Maccaulay would not to be praising India in such laudatory language, even if certain aspect of India was so spectacular. To comments made by many others.. I will add The fact number of us think of western or british values in glorifying terms could be attributed to the domination of Indians by British, but it is equally important to realize that such attitude in the first place was also the very cause of domination by British (or foreign powers) This last sentence of mine is not mine but paraphrased statment (crudly by me) of Vinoba Bhave May 10, 2010 ARVINDBABU said... Just let us all forget about what Lord Macaulay said 150 years ago. British ruled us and they were more powerful. Poverty and power have always existed in India and all other countries. The British ruled other countries also. What statements they made on the roads or in the parliament should not matter now. It is done and dusted. You cannot rewrite

what some one has said. Even if you do it does not change the present. Does it? And what are we all doing now.? The statements made in India even in the recent times in India are no better. However, after reading what is written, I observe we all have an intellectual mind to research to find the facts. During the time of Lord William Benting, Advocated by Lord Macaulay supported by Raja Ram Mohan Roy, English was introduced. The history of English in India was commenced with Raja Ram Mohan Roy's campaign for introducing scientific education in India through English medium. And then English has been adopted in India as a language of education and literary expression besides being an important medium of communication on a vast scale. Raja Ram Mohan Roy held the view that one should neither have blind faith in one's past nor should one imitate the Western culture and civilization blindly. He advised his countrymen that they should acquire and store all that was best in both East and West. People in power make errors. During the Indian war of Independence and struggle for freedom there were many errors on both sides. Power is craved because of the pleasure it brings, but the history of statesmanship recounted in the past brings all of us a very different perception: individual power has to be given up in the interest of public welfare. This is a study of the use and abuse of power. It is not that in itself power is good or bad. It is essentially a force, a weapon that can be used to save and foster or to harm and extort: Desiring power first as an instrument for the achievement of other ends, is the game of the present day politics. Arvind babu June 07, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Arvind Very valid comments, though I would not agree that Lord Macaulay is dead and gone. His actions had a profound impact not just how India was run, but on colonial policy in general, created the template for future strategies for world dominion and solidified the Eurocentric views of the world that we still live with. Most of all, we in India institutionalized Macaulay. Remember, Indian reformers were coming to English with the perspective of social reform, but by end of nineteenth century, English had already become the language of privilege; after Gandhi, this had become a divide right in the middle of the country. While Macaulay is still credited with the affirmative action in India, the cultural divide still continues to keep us from creation of an unchallenged Indian identity. I agree that power is value neutral, but it exists in the context of our society and hence uses and abuses of power can be and should be judged. I observed Macaulay did what he had to do: He achieved his objectives brilliantly. However, his 'Englishmen in taste' took his doctrine farther than his wildest imaginations, and subjugated, as cruelly as colonial masters would have done, the majority of people in India who speak no English!

Supriyo June 07, 2010 Anonymous said... This blog I read only now.It appears that the writer has a valid point to doubt about the purported statement of Macaulay which is floating only for the past few years.Dr.N.Ramasubramanyan' August 04, 2010 Anonymous said... This blog I read only now.It appears that the writer has a valid point to doubt about the purported statement of Macaulay which is floating only for the past few years.Dr.N.Ramasubramanyan' August 04, 2010 AIR Announcers said... I liked your blog. Please take a look at http://indiaexplored.wordpress.com. Thanks. August 10, 2010

kochuthresiamma p .j said... i read this post after forwarding the mail which i too got. and i did wonder how i missed this particular quote. however, whatever altruistic sentiments he had added to soften the insulting observations in his obnoxious speech on the introduction of english education in india,he remains the classic example of an incurable imperialist. the sentiments expressed are an open confession of thee need for hegemonic control over the subcontinent. August 13, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... I would guess Macaulay did not add altruistic statements to soften things: He genuinely believed that he is suggesting a good thing. That would be consistent to his Victorian spirit, and not very unlike the way we feel when we do something about Africa or Afghanistan.

In a way, Macaulay was one of the pioneers of globalization, and great-grandfather of our IT Enabled glory. At the same time, he was furthering the imperial agenda. He was a liberal, remember: So, his approach to imperialism was to see this as a force for good. Again, not very unlike our today's liberals, who, like Obama, would not mind killing a few people for the sake of bringing democracy. August 13, 2010

kochuthresiamma p .j said... like all liberals of his agee, Mcaulay was schrizophrenic in his perception of the imperialistic enterprise - caught up in the colonial discourse about the subject race being evolutionary drop outs and Britain being divinely ordaained to facilitate the colonised to catch up with the progressive nations of europe.The white man's burden type of a thing.mcaulay in these quotes comes across as a typical sample of the selfstyled saviour of mankind - particularly of those who inhabit the asian and african continents. sorry, i dont intend to trgger off an argument - but mcaulay's speech on english education in India always gets me very angry. August 13, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... So it should. There is no disagreement that Macaulay indeed saw Indians as a subject race devoid of the gifts of modern science and rational thinking. That was the whole enlightenment thing that Europeans to this day take pride in. It is also interesting to see Macaulay's comments in the perspective of the debates of his day. These comments were made in the indirect context of the Orientalist/ occidentalist debates. There were a few Indians, most notably Raja Rammohan Roy, who wanted English Science and Rationalism incorporated in the Indian education system. At the same time, there were a number of English orientalists who were discovering the treasures of Sankskrit literature. Macaulay made no secrets where he belonged: That position is still maintained by a number of Eurocentric historians and policy makers even today. I understand your anger, but it is possible to see both sides of the argument. There is no what-if analysis in history and therefore, not much merit in imagining India without Macaulay. The whole debate can be seen as the eternal debate of globalization vs local values, as well as imperialism versus nationalism, and there will always be two sides in the debate. We can, however, nake an unambigous commitment to human freedom and dignity, stepping out of Macaulay's racist assumptions but, at the same time, embracing enlightenment values: This same combination was celebrated by the founding fathers of the Indian republic and is ingrained in our freedom.

August 13, 2010 Anonymous said... If language is a relflection of civilization, the English language is Grammatically and phonetically one of the poorest languages in the world. Even the lesser known dialects of India have better grammar that English. On the other hand perfection of Sanskrit language is well known. It is highly presumtuous to think that the current civilization is the most advanced as it is the most volatile and destructive periods in human history and to add to that an ecological disaster is looming large. Indian knowledge is gaining more ground today than ever before, the latest theories in Quantum physics mirrors the most ancient sayings of the Rig Veda 1:1. Indian wisdom is perennial wisdom and is not subject to ravages by time as its soucre is the ultimate reality of life itself. If people who have been living in caves all their lives deny the existence of the Sun, how does it affect the sun? European interpretations of Indian literature have been highly biased and superficial and lac basic understanding of the eastern perspective on life. Downfall of India in the last millenium is mirrored in the downfall of west bengal in the last half century where intellectual babus (manufactured by English Education) sit on their big fat asses and debate on inconsequential issues forever thinking they are more intelligent than all others bcoz they've read shakespere and milton. West Bengal that has produced greats like Swami Vivekananda, tagore and countless other Gems (Who dont owe their greatness to English education) has been reduced to a stinking pile of rubbish. If bengal can fall due to being complacent why not India? You have seen the fall of India, now you'll witness its rise and this rise will be on the basis of its indegenous knowledge and wisdom not McCauly's Clerk Factory. August 26, 2010 kochuthresiamma p j said... @ anonymous Mc's Clerk factory :-)love the expression. your coinaage or standard expression? shouldnt compare english with sanskrit. sanskrit can be compared to latin -both are parent languages which died cos they wouldnt compromise with the perfection of their grammar. they ceased to become dynamic. the dynamic derivatives of both languages

survived. the romance languages from latin and the languages of N india inclding hindi from sanskrit. english is a derivative of germanic . the trouble with indians is, we gloat about the past while wallowing in the filth of the present. what's the point if my grandfather owned a palace if i am at the moment sleeping on the pavements? August 27, 2010 Anonymous said... Wonderful article indeed and rightfully exposing a fraudulent action on the part of the so called nationalists. If a hoax email is required to convince others of the country's past then that itself shows how hollow the attempt is. English was a good byproduct of the British rule, no denying that and if anyone believes otherwise they should have the guts to renounce English and keep their kids away from this language. Walk the talk guys and girls instead of enjoying the benefits of this language and also indulge in English bashing just to please a few idiots! August 31, 2010 maxxi said... Hi All of you guys for this great debate...Indians certainly have a lot of time...God knows how? Please tell me, I am thinking of giving up my job as a psychiatrist in UK and coming to practice in India....Will my training in English Language and UK expereince be a hinderance or benefit to the community in India I intend to serve? September 06, 2010 Anonymous said... I am just stuck on one of your comments: "Are you sure that India didn't have poverty prior to 1832" Its hard to ascertain this but there are fact around that point toward India being the richest states of the world. Here is a small list: 1. India was the only producer/ supplier of Diamonds before 1895 2. India was often called "Golden Bird" and its a fact that India owned most gold of the world before british invasion. ABout 3/4th of worlds gold was in India. 3. Even today every Indian household may not have food to eat but has gold in locker (shows love for gold) 4. India is the only country that is termed a subcontinent...you know why? Well because

it seprated from African continent and stayed a seperate continent of its own with most all resources available with no other nations to share it with. I am not sure if those comments was made by that stupid Britisher or not but its a fact that It was money and greed that brought Britishers to India and they took all they could before India got independence. September 07, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... I usually publish all comments posted on this website, unless they are completely irrelevant to the discussion. In that note, Maxxi's comments are not really relevant, but I have still put it up for a reason. I would think the comments are somewhat unkind - an unwelcome reflection on how other people 'should' spend their time. Besides, this stereotypes Indians, not an welcome thing by any way, and goes on to show one of the less welcome aspects of elitism that some of the commentators have alluded to before. Regarding the poverty in India, there is no point in trying to claim India's past glory by citing various tidbits. India and China were surely rich countries, contributing to 50% of World GDP by the turn of the nineteenth century. But this did not rule out poverty of the common people, I shall argue the wealth was too much tied to the land and a disproportionate share of that wealth went into taxes and considerations to various kings and landlords, who then spent it into leisurely pursuits and wastefulness, rather than developing infrastructure, innovating the education system, developing commercial systems or investing in public wellbeing. The English could dominate us with ease because of these reasons. We had nothing to match their industrial power. Besides, one has to remember, India was subdued not by the British monarch and its armies, but by an English company, many ways the first multinational in the world, who operated with the logic of money. Macaulay's comments, from that perspective, can be compared with marketing strategies of some of the multinationals today, those which alter the consumption behaviour of a particular category of people completely. September 07, 2010 Khalid Ansari said... About India being called a golden bird in the past I would say that the money and land was not distributed equally among people at that time. And it is not just about India. Almost all the countries in those old times had this issue. Even today "despite India having the second highest economic growth rate in the world, has more poor people than 26 of Africas poorest countries put together". This quotation is from the article by Arundhati Roy - http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-

library/dawn/news/world/03-the-trickledown-revolution-ss-05. The point which I am trying to make is that I think India at that time had poor people. There must have been beggars and theifs too. And moreover as a personal thought. I think there is no time or place in history or future which is without poor people. Money just don't rain down. We are on earth and not in heaven yet. September 23, 2010 Khalid Ansari said... @Maxxi September 06, 2010 Definetely you can serve Indians like most doctors are already doing it here. I hope you have not forgotten your mother tongue - Hindi. Even hindi is not spoken by a lot of people in Indian villages. They just know their regional language. And it is alright because they don't have time and money to learn new languages even if government makes it the national language. But you are the lucky one to know the language to communicate in India - (Hindi) and Internationally - (English). And moreover whom are you kidding? I bet you have done your education through English medium. Reading and learning the works of great men and women in the study of brain and behavior. Are those works written in Hindi? Or by Indians mostly? Or is it by British? Or American mostly? Or is it a mix of different countries? Now who has the burden of translating the works by scientists and psychologists to our language? Do you really think Einstein should have translated his special and general theory of relativity in Hindi so that others who know only hindi should be able to read his work? Or should the person who wishes to know his work learn the language in which his work is written? Psychiatry did not took birth in India. You got a chance to learn something and bring it to Indian society. If you are so much concerned then you should write a book in Hindi so that people can read it here - the ones which know only hindi. And it would be really nice if people can do that instead of feeling guilty by getting educated in English. If you may then please think as if you are studying in English and then understanding their work secretly and then would finally steal it from them and give it to people of our land. It would be really nice if we Indians can translate works of history and science to Hindi so that many people can understand. I am not saying this by standing away from the crowd. I am part of the crowd and would really want some works to be translated to Hindi. Whatever the case may be but you can't have best of both the words. You can't get educated in English and live in England for a better future and money but yet complaining as if what a pain you going through by doing that and being away from your culture. Definitely we should not embrace other cultures and leave ours. That is kiddish. It is pain to see young Indian kids loving something foreign just because it is foreign or modern in

someway or some style statement. But that does not mean that we continue to carry everything our culture gives us or reject everything foreign without questioning and judging. It may seem that I have gone away from the topic but I have not. The topic is connected by one main thought - Why are some of us going through a guilt trip by accepting some part of foreign culture? September 23, 2010 Khalid Ansari said... @Maxxi September 06, 2010 Definetely you can serve Indians like most doctors are already doing it here. I hope you have not forgotten your mother tongue - Hindi. Even hindi is not spoken by a lot of people in Indian villages. They just know their regional language. And it is alright because they don't have time and money to learn new languages even if government makes it the national language. But you are the lucky one to know the language to communicate in India - (Hindi) and Internationally - (English). And moreover whom are you kidding? I bet you have done your education through English medium. Reading and learning the works of great men and women in the study of brain and behavior. Are those works written in Hindi? Or by Indians mostly? Or is it by British? Or American mostly? Or is it a mix of different countries? Now who has the burden of translating the works by scientists and psychologists to our language? Do you really think Einstein should have translated his special and general theory of relativity in Hindi so that others who know only hindi should be able to read his work? Or should the person who wishes to know his work learn the language in which his work is written? Psychiatry did not took birth in India. You got a chance to learn something and bring it to Indian society. If you are so much concerned then you should write a book in Hindi so that people can read it here - the ones which know only hindi. And it would be really nice if people can do that instead of feeling guilty by getting educated in English. If you may then please think as if you are studying in English and then understanding their work secretly and then would finally steal it from them and give it to people of our land. It would be really nice if we Indians can translate works of history and science to Hindi so that many people can understand. September 23, 2010 Khalid Ansari said... Continued... I am not saying this by standing away from the crowd. I am part of the crowd and would really want some works to be translated to Hindi. Whatever the case may be but you can't have best of both the words. You can't get educated in English and live in England for a

better future and money but yet complaining as if what a pain you going through by doing that and being away from your culture. Definitely we should not embrace other cultures and leave ours. That is kiddish. It is pain to see young Indian kids loving something foreign just because it is foreign or modern in someway or some style statement. But that does not mean that we continue to carry everything our culture gives us or reject everything foreign without questioning and judging. September 23, 2010 Shiva said... I wanted to check the veracity of this quote too as I just saw a post on facebook touting this quote. I came across the gutenberg site. It contains a list of all of Lord Macaulay's speeches and there's no record of any speeches between July 11, 1833 and May 28, 1839. He made a speech to British parliament on July 10, 1833 on India; but the speech does not contain the quote. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/25903/25903-h/25903-h.htm September 26, 2010 Rahmath said... i got the same email and was wondering whether i should forward it or not.Still something felt wron adn i wanted to check the authenticity of hte quote...thanks October 01, 2010 Anonymous said... Mr. Supriyo Chaudhuri, thanks for leaving India (and if your forefathers have done so then thanks to them). I felt really bad that an Indian wrote this article supporting Lord Macaulay. English have promoted their education system to rule other nations and Macaulay supported "his" culture and nation. It doesn't matter whether this quote was made my him is true or not but Indian education system was in no way inferior than English education system. English have ruined our culture of "Guru Shishya parampara". Well I made this comment not because I am a RSS agent or chauvinist but because your article in the end sounds like English are superior and we Indians are inferior. I appreciate your effort to seek truth about Macaulay's quote because even I came across your blog seeking the same. Your support for English people really SUCKS!!!. October 08, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Hi Thanks for dropping by and commenting. However, if I may say something in my own defense, I only wanted to verify Macaulay's statement as reported and found it to be false. I thought we Indians don't need to be defensive about our past and once we start accepting history as it is and acknowledging the facts, we shall emerge as a confident, honest nation. Besides, truth be told, I do not think one culture may have all wrong things and the other, all things right. Macaulay played his part in spreading English education, with a simple bureaucratic aim of governing India better: That was his job, which he ended up doing well. This did indeed do harm to Indian cultural traditions, but a careful reading of history will reveal that Indian education system by then declined to state of disrepair. Think of it this way: If our education system was better, and our nationhood was so glorious, how would the British conquer us in the first place, to give Macaulay this chance of subverting us. Lastly, I wanted to say that we Indians will do well to beat Macaulay in his own game: By learning the good things Western civilization offers, not by rejecting it. I strongly believe that the power in the world remains with the curious. If we close our doors and minds and think of going back to our past, we lose. Supriyo October 08, 2010

kochuthresiamma p .j said... 'By learning the good things Western civilization offers, not by rejecting it.' agree with you there. it'd be foolish to throw the baby out with the bath water. but it'd be equally foolish to put the baby on a pedestal and worship it. October 09, 2010 atchu said... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9CKQC9kTtE pls go to 1:55 min October 09, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Regarding the last comment regarding the East India Company, it is good to see that the story is being picked up and glorified as a national achievement. I did watch Mr. Sanjeev Gupta receive an award for 'ingenuity in business' in this year's Asian Achievers Award in Britain. I learnt that he bought over East India Company, which was defunct at the time of purchase, and is setting up a luxury shop at Mayfair, London, presumably to sell luxury Indian goods. Looking around at the crowd at the Asian Achievers Award, I knew that the assembled millionaires in the room will indeed line up to buy some of the luxury items, branded with history. One word of caution, though: This is great marketing, but this does not make India great. It does not take away the potholes and the poverty, the corruption and our inability to move forward with even the basic rights for our poor people. We have done almost nothing to overturn the legacy of the East India Company: We have just replaced them with a new privileged class. October 13, 2010

versatile genie! said... Hi Supriyo, I too, just like you, got an email forward of so called "Macaulay's words" from a friend... and I did log-in to the internet just to check if the words of Macaulay were authentic or not... I didn't want to find the authenticity to be either proud of my country, India or support the English... I just wanted to do it out of curiosity. What I found when I googled was your blog as the first search result... and I need not had to go anywhere else... I found whatever I wanted in this one place... I esp. loved the conversation between you and Sanket... so insightful! Not only did I learn about the originality of the email forward but various conversations you have had in the blog comments did make me think... think about all those things you and others have said... Quite introspective!!! I personally don't have any opinion... neither about "Macaulay" nor about the ugly past.. I have personally learned a lot because of all these.. and would like to move on slowly at times and fast at other times... progressing to a perfect future... a successful India. I also thank you for decently and patiently replying to all (almost all :)) the blog comments you have got. Many a times blog-writers either ban commenting or abuse the one who abuses them... and this is so much more common with us Indians as most of us can't take the realty straight.

Thank you for the article... Hoping to see more introspective articles from you.. Regards VG October 29, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Hi VG Many thanks for your kind words. It was an interesting journey since I did the blog post out of curiousity. There were two parts of the narrative: (a) Did Macaulay say these things? (b) Whether he was morally right in doing what he did? I wanted an answer to the first question, but invariably got drawn to the other one. You have correctly noted that this conversation was interesting, and I enormously enjoyed being a part of it, even though some of the commentators were sceptical about my sincerity. I must admit, however, that while it was easier to answer the first question - that this quote is a spoof and someone invented it to support a doctrine of false history (and, I shall argue, that the same set of people are intent on peddling a doctrine of false prosperity at this time) - it was more difficult to judge the second. I did write about it again and again, as you can see in http://sundayposts.blogspot.com/2008/12/macaulayand-i.html. I also had an interesting conversation one time over my efforts on this post, though this happened in the context of another post http://sundayposts.blogspot.com/2009/05/question-of-caste-how-caste-affects.html. In essence, I enjoyed this journey and learnt a lot on the way. Supriyo October 29, 2010

Nikhil Sheth said... Supriyo, good job. I wish we had more people like you. I love the factual analysis here, both in the post as well as comments. I hope the bashers and bullies in the first few comments must have made peace with their misconceptions by now. It's funny how people can go so blind when they refuse to change a belief in the light of facts. I reply with this link every time I get the same silly email forwarded to me.

The latest variant has some completely irrelevant old photos of a kid sitting on a dead cheetah, the (british-made!) parliament bldg and president palace in delhi, the jama masjid, a bunch of indian ladies in a group pic, among others. I don't know what the heck the author was trying to convey there - suddenly I'm supposed to link it all to India's glory. And then, of course, the infamous fake address of our friend Macaulay ;) November 22, 2010 proudestkafir said... What is your agenda? Let us assume that the british ruler ( Actually I would have loved to use unparliamentary language to describe this chappy, but shall let it pass) did indeed not make the statement about India being either great or a moribund country, how does it really matter? If your agenda is to defame nationalists at any cost( I believe that is your agenda)then all I can say is good luck.Indians are not that ignorant these days.Living in UK does not give any one additional brain cells to comment on nationalists! lived in london for 15 years and got fed up of the white trash's way of life and have moved back to india.The fact is Indian history has always been written by the victors and they will never glorify what was In India.If India was full of beggars and poverty, why did people tray and search for India from all over the world? Makes you wonder. December 14, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... I think we are still moving in cycles. The only point I wanted to make is whether or not Macaulay made the comments. It seems very unlikely he did, and certainly he did not make those comments in the British parliament. What I read later makes me think these comments were a later invention mixing up what he wrote about the province of Bengal in his essay on Clive (which later inspired Churchill) and given a cynical spin for the benefit of someone making a case against English education. Apart from this fact, my point is Macaulay did what he was supposed to do: Create an efficient, humane or not, administration system for the British. At the hindsight, his idea of creating an English educated native class played out well for the British; indeed, this is the way India was subjugated for another century or so. I am not sure whether Macaulay understood what he did in effect - destroyed the privilege systems constructed around Sanskrit and Farsi and built a new one around English - because he was too much of a Victorian: Deeply faithful in the Enlightenment values and blissfully ignorant of the depth and diversity of Indian culture. Remember, he was not arguing against Indians that time; he was arguing with the Orientalists, those Englishmen who were working to discover the same Sanskrit and Farsi literature, philosophy and science that Macaulay was so dismissive of. What he equated the Indian culture with is the decadence and disease and famines and religious excesses that he saw or were told about, and his enlightenment values stood steadfast against

those. Indeed, he failed to explore deeper; but, then, he achieved what he set out to achieve - the British dominance of India. History, in my view, isn't a black and white thing. It is not a movie, or a political pamphlet. Right and wrong are hard to judge, because it depends upon where you stand. Were Lord Macaulay wrong? He was not an Indian nationalist; what if he learned to talk about 'brown trash' borrowing your language? Does this make him bad or good? I have watched this debate for two years now, and the variety of points of views have been fascinating. I am deeply grateful to all commentators, as this was a great experience for me. This has also allowed me to explore, ask and learn. However, on a couple of things, I am still a bit baffled and I shall ask the two questions here: (a) Why do you think living in India allows someone to claim more love for their country? You said you lived fifteen years in Britain, and I am on my seventh. So, I am just curious, what establishes the claim of loving India comparatively more? (b) Also, why do you have to love India through untruth and made up stories? Is it unlovable otherwise? I am in complete agreement with you if you say that India is a great country and we don't need a reinvention of Macaulay to prove the same. In the end, I would say that I see a battle for the soul of India. At one end, rightly, are the ones created by Lord Macaulay, the ones who speak English and use it for protecting their privileges; on the other are those who Mahatma and others brought to party, those people who do not know 'manners' but as truly Indian as anyone else. A battle against Macaulay's legacy is indeed being raged, but it is not being played out in the obvious places by obvious actors. I shall claim that we are beating Macaulay in his own game if we can rise above lies and inventions and can embrace India for what it is. December 15, 2010 bavishya said... I just have these questions: 1. Do you all agree that our very backbone of this nation- the cultural & spiritual heritage has been broken? 2. Do you all agree that our ancient education systems have vanished ? 3. Do you all agree that our "culture" is in the verge of being orphaned? Then.. whether its a spoof or not, the intent is proved. We had been such wonderful Indians... Our culture.. spirituality...Values.. Pride ... Probably a freedom fight should not have happened.. Because, neither have we tasted the

best of western culture NOR have we retained the best of our culture. Jusr when we were at the crossroads, we got independence - AS CONFUSED INDIANS. December 20, 2010

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Hi Thanks for your comments. Since you asked such pointed questions, let me say what I think: First, it is possibly a wrong analogy to see 'culture' as a fixed thing, like a backbone. It is rather liquid, which mixes with others and changes. And, for this very characteristic, culture lives on: India of the old has not vanished. If it did, you would not talk about it anymore. Just that we now have a different perspective, I shall argue, richer in some way, and have a more informed debate. Second, the pathshalas vanished today, but they lived much after Macaulay though - well into the twentieth century. The destruction of Pathshalas have more to do with independent India's attempts to spread state school education to villages than the power of Macaulay. Madrashas had a better fate: That is primarily because of the community's rejection of English education (despite efforts like Aligarh Muslim University) and later, the secular education offered by the Indian government. So, the ancient education systems did not vanish overnight because of Macaulay: That will give the dead Lord credits he does not deserve. They rather died a natural death, or morphed into something else. Third, the culture being orphaned is an interesting comment, particularly because many people who will agree with the contents of your comment believe that it is going through a regeneration. But, if I understand correctly, you are talking about 'secularlisation' of culture, de-linking it from the religion. If so, this is what I think: I think culture and religion is inversely related - religion being the offspring of culture, serving it as a 'knowledge system', a system of codes, symbols, heros and taboos. Macaulay didn't secularize India: That was done many years later, more for the sake of a creating a 'nation'. The secular culture that you complaint about is the very basis, and created for the sake of, the nation you are proud of and pleading the case for. I am not sure I shall say Indians are confused, because such a generalizations can not and should not be made. I would think that we should not complain about being given the responsibility to decide about ourselves. It does indeed seem to be the point, in this whole spoof of shifting blame to a dead Englishman. Lying about history may make feel some people comfortable, but, I shall argue, shying away from our responsibility is the problem, not what Macaulay wanted to say or do. December 21, 2010

Anil said... More than British parliament of 1830s, Indians, after 180 years, are worried about Macaulay's comments. Its a well known fact that most of the British raj and East-India company personalities are concerned with business. Introduction of English or construction of railway lanes, what ever they did it was for Britain's prosperity. Better we stop blaming others for our problems and start working to solve them. January 19, 2011 Anonymous said... hi, do you think any "bad" statements made by macualay will still be available ? just to tell you visit arun shourie website and see this...http://arunshourie.voiceofdharma.com/articles ..a book was written by an muslim ,telling that temple was destroyed and mosque was established on it...and then after the ayodya movement ,he took off those pages from his book... in simiral way ,subramainan swamy article tells another way how a book was banned and made sure that its not available anywhere... this is internet era and info is the weapon..., and by the way leftists have started naming macualay as mahatma of downtrodden... March 24, 2011 Anonymous said... Missionary colleges in india have of late started spreading messages that macaulay tried to help downtrodden people and that he is great humanist... that is the reason why macualay is being priced by leftists and missionaries to spread their christianity... and education is the sector missions think that will give most benefit in terms of numbers converted... March 24, 2011

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Hello Thanks for dropping by. I find your comment about comments made by Macaulay being selectively erased interesting. This means that you are ready to believe something that has no material evidence on the basis of a suspicion that it may have existed.

I must admit my comments on Macaulay were meant to warn against such 'construction' of History. As I have said before, responding to other comments, it is not so much about whether Macaulay was right or wrong, but that we are wrong in conjuring up statements that was never made, in a desperate attempt to blame a dead Englishman for our own failings. I do not share your fears about conversions though I am also Hindu. I do think Hinduism has many things to offer to the world, but our approach to the less fortunate is not one of them. In fact, Hinduism singularly failed to integrate the 'lower classes' and offer them the basic dignity of life; hence, the conversions, not just to the 'alien' ones that you are trying to talk about, but also to Budhdhism, Jainism, Sikhism, and other modern religions coming out of India. I think it is time we grow up, not hide behind Macaulay or a leftist threat that does not exist, and admit our failures, and make a fresh start. Supriyo March 24, 2011 Kapil Saraswat said... Hi, I would like to say even if it is spread by RSS or any other organization in india this is in the favour of india. Yesterday I was looking a book of sanskrit in Nai Sadak in New Delhi and I got disappointed that the books of Sanskrit are not available in market. Many countries in world had made seperate sections for the Sanskrit and they are promoting to use it. But, Where are we going we are loosing our moral values, our culture, tradition. These are the basic values on which India and Indians live, but we are loosing them. Brothers, This is a country of All relegions and regions. We can be a strong only if we are Akhand Bharat. March 28, 2011

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Hi Kapil We must preserve our tradition and I fully agree that we are wrong to kill it off. Remember Macaulay's efforts were directed against Sanskrit and Farsi, the dominant medium of education during his time, and we must equally mourn the decline of Farsi. I hope you will agree. Finally, there are better ways to reclaim our past than spreading false history. In fact, once we learn to face our history, we shall learn to respect our history. Supriyo

March 28, 2011

sukesh rai said... i really agree with mr. supriyo, since it is not believable that during the time india was plundered by muslim rulers, there were no beggars on the streets. it is our tendendancy to blame our present. thats why people are thinking of what would happen if British would not have ruled india. but i really do believe that british are better than afgan or persian rulers who have tear the very fabric of our society, at least they introduced an education system. removed the bad things from our society like child marriage, sati system etc. they united india built a strong army otherwise we would be fighting with each other, there would be civil war everywhere like africa. May 07, 2011 Viggy said... hey Supriyo, First of all, congratulations on initiating and sustaining the most stimulating potpourri of conversations, ideas and emotions I have ever read! Of course, I cannot say I have read a lot, so the compliment may not be too valuable. Yet, seriously, from Jan 2008 to May 2011 and still going strong... I admire your dedication to this blog, adding fuel to a fire which just does not seem to go out. Moving on, I find precious few comments being made objectively. Is this inability to distance ourselves from what we deign to pronounce judgment on helping us at all? I was overcome by this nagging feeling as I read the last few comments, that over three years, all people have done is more or less chase their own tails. Many people talk about change, that India is rising, that we will attain that pinnacle that we believe we were once occupying. My only question is, what is the yardstick for the measurement of this achievement? GDP, poverty lines and scientific achievements seem to me to be very crude standards of prosperity (Read 'The Happy Man's shirt', an Italian folktale I believe). You will always have a mixture of good and bad wherever you go. Some nations hide it well, others do not. So what is this debate really about? I feel, and this is just in my inexperienced opinion, that this debate is about insecurity, it is about this raging fire inside the Indian to be recognized as coming from a Great nation. Does he not realize that being proclaimed great by a thousand people will not make him feel great, because in his eyes, someone else is always greater. Something is wrong somewhere, and all the praise in the world will not help cure it.

Owing to the basest part of my nature, I am itching to judge the arguments I just read. I am convinced that the letter is not authentic. I once believed that it was, and harbored a lot of anger against the British. This anger made me narrow minded, and I admit, chauvinistic. I can only imagine the feelings it aroused in hearts more temperamental than mine. May 21, 2011

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Viggy Thanks: I couldn't agree with you more. I have always found this as a great showcase of our insecurity, not what makes us great but what keeps us from being great. Creating a modern nation is not about paint-brushing history, but about acknowledging it and moving on. I don't condone what Macaulay did. He, an imperial administrator, understood and exploited a great weakness in India, its divided society, and made it an instrument of colonial rule. He was the precursor of modern imperialism, the principle of cultural dominion rather than a military one, later taken to a global scale by the Americans. My sole point still remains that we can't escape this by denying what happened, but by acknowledging it and by consciously not doing what Macaulay did. So, as we line up to get our children to the best schools in town and moved ourselves to the gated communities in Delhi, Mumbai or Bangalore, we are still seeking the privileged isolation that Macaulay gifted to a few Indians in return of they being accomplices of imperial enterprise. As you say, India's greatness will not come from the growth of GDP, but how many of its citizens have a decent life, have enough to eat, have access to healthcare and education and can hope to have a decent life. In the end, thanks again for dropping by and I shall look forward to keep in touch. Supriyo May 21, 2011 Murugaprabu Marimuthu said... Hey your view points are completely wrong. Lord Macaulay wanted to colonize india. You have been beautifully hypnotized by his master plan. It is because of the english education by the west, people of india though that speaking english and knowing science is superior. Due to this thought they gave up their spiritual and cultural heritage. Previously education in India till 20 was only one thing. Making your mind strong with great will power with practises like meditation. These ignorant west doesn't know anything in this matter. Read more of Swami vivekananda to know about this. He knows

complete India. He mentions that, India education system introduced by Macaulay is just a bread winning education. I think you should be working in some other country other than India but you are an Indian citizen. You are so selfish. You are earning money for yourself by being a servant of some foreign company. You do nothing on your own to bring India up and help the people of India. You make all useless comments like this. You are a very good hypnotized, ignorant fool. May 24, 2011

Supriyo Chaudhuri said... Hi Thanks for dropping by and commenting. I see you missed the point here: All I said is that the quote which was passed on as Macaulay's is fabricated. I haven't tried to condone or condemn what Macaulay did or did not do, but had to say that falsifying history is not the way to build a self-confident nation. I hope you will agree. It is best to see history as a neutral thing: You can't change what Macaulay did. If we all sought to know the truth, what Vivekananda, Gandhi and everyone else worth mentioning would have thought as a good idea, we can use history to our advantage, however difficult it might have been. This is all I suggested. For your various other comments, I live in England and I don't think that reduces my claim to call the right and wrong. I consider myself as a global citizen, open, flexible and curious, and I have lived and want to live in different countries and know about different cultures. In a way, I am confronting Macaulay in my own way: I am sure he would not have wanted me to engage with the world in my own terms. Supriyo May 24, 2011

I. Vijay Aditya said... Hi I like your blog, very enlightening, I hope you can check out mine.. I have some intersting thoughts and have a blog on Sai Baba you may be interested in... May 30, 2011 Post a Comment Links to this post Happy Independence Day to my fellow Indians

Happy Independence Day to my fellow Indians, pic from unknown source, uploaded to Flickr by FredMikeRudy. We Had No Beggars in India. Right. Today on August 15, India's Day of Independence from British Rule, I received this frequently ... From: noreply@blogger.com (Virtual Poona Blogger) at August 16, 2010 Create a Link Newer Post Older Post Home Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

About Me

Supriyo Chaudhuri London, United Kingdom I am a dreamer. I believe in ideas, like people should be free to talk their mind and to connect, that we should respect each other regardless of who we are and where we come from, and that everyone should have an equal opportunity to make it in life. I notice that it does not work that way. But I am an optimist: I believe in the power of technology and ultimate goodness of human nature, and believe that we will, one day, achieve true freedom, human dignity and equal access. Strangely, my faith does not come from futurism, but from reading history, and from my conversations with amazing people all around the world who are working tirelessly to make it a better place. I wish to write about these ideas, these people and these dreams on this blog. View my complete profile

Updates on Email
Top of Form

Enter your email address:

http://feeds.feedb Sunday Posts

en_US

Subscribe

Delivered by FeedBurner
Bottom of Form

Followers Blog Archive

Visitors

Check Out These Blogs

Nick Carr's Blog - RoughType India : Riding The Elephant Entrepreneurs on nPost Conversations With An Optimist Third World View from Rezwan

Communities To Join

The New Constructs - A Collaborative Book for The Connected Age Opposing Views - Discuss Issues You Care Most About

The Final Word

We shall not cease from exploration, And at the end of all our exploring Will be to arrive where we started, And know the place for the first time. - T S Eliot