Guest guest Posted December 26, 2005 Report Share Posted December 26, 2005 http://www.india-forum.com/articles/55/1/Harvard-professor-launches-anti-Hindu-C\ rusade Harvard professor launches anti-Hindu Crusade Quiz # 1: "Hindus in the USA are lost or abandoned people!" "NRI stands for Non-Returning Indians!" "Indians in the USA do not invest in the higher education of their children!" Who in the USA do you think would have made derogatory statements to this effect? A. A Ku Klux Klansman B. A Bible thumping fundamentalist from Alabama C. A Xenophobe who is paranoid about immigrants settling in the USA D. A Harvard Sanskrit professor Correct answer: D. I am sure none of you scored right on this. So, read on and get informed. Harvard professor disparages Hindus ...... more in the artcle. Thanks L & L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2005 Report Share Posted December 26, 2005 I do not see how this kind of distortion and misrepresentation has a place on this list. This article is written by someone who has differences over history with Michael Witzel; that does not make MW a bigot. MW organized a protest against certain proposed revisions of textbooks, not because he is anti-Hindu (he is a distinguished scholar of Sanskrtic studies) but because of historical distortions, which were discussed on the allegedly "Communist" list Indo-Eurasia. (Too ridiculous!) I didn't save them so can't give examples, other than one which claims that Vedic culture is hundreds of thousands of years old. This Mr. Kalyanaraman gotten into trouble for misrepresentations more than once on several scholarly listservs, and this article is one more instance. ><http://www.india-forum.com/articles/55/1/Harvard-professor-launches-anti-Hindu\ -Crusade>http://www.india-forum.com/articles/55/1/Harvard-professor-launches-ant\ i-Hindu-Crusade > >Harvard professor launches anti-Hindu Crusade -- Max Dashu Suppressed Histories Archives Global Women's History http://www.suppressedhistories.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2005 Report Share Posted December 26, 2005 Good Moring Max. Well for you look back we have many others distortion and misrepresentation articles here in our group. We tolerate most of them. I am the one who approve that message, because I know somebody will come up and enlightened us more. You did. And I thank you. Hope you have a wonderful New Year !!!!!!!!!! cheers ! , Max Dashu <maxdashu@l...> wrote: > > I do not see how this kind of distortion and misrepresentation has a > place on this list. This article is written by someone who has > differences over history with Michael Witzel; that does not make MW a > bigot. MW organized a protest against certain proposed revisions of > textbooks, not because he is anti-Hindu (he is a distinguished > scholar of Sanskrtic studies) but because of historical distortions, > which were discussed on the allegedly "Communist" list Indo- Eurasia. > (Too ridiculous!) I didn't save them so can't give examples, other > than one which claims that Vedic culture is hundreds of thousands of > years old. > > This Mr. Kalyanaraman gotten into trouble for misrepresentations more > than once on several scholarly listservs, and this article is one > more instance. > > ><http://www.india-forum.com/articles/55/1/Harvard-professor- launches-anti-Hindu-Crusade>http://www.india- forum.com/articles/55/1/Harvard-professor-launches-anti-Hindu-Crusade > > > >Harvard professor launches anti-Hindu Crusade > > -- > Max Dashu > Suppressed Histories Archives > Global Women's History > http://www.suppressedhistories.net > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2005 Report Share Posted December 26, 2005 , Max Dashu <maxdashu@l...> wrote: > This article is written by someone who has differences over history with Michael Witzel; that does not make MW >a > bigot. Did you read the article? You wont be saying this if you did. He is very well known for his condescending attitude and distortions. Witzel is the one who gives distorted interpreations. The California board threw his letter into dust bin after proper examination. You can observe his racist remarks in various lists. >MW organized a protest against certain proposed revisions of > textbooks, not because he is anti-Hindu (he is a distinguished > scholar of Sanskrtic studies) He was exposed as a charlatan not once but many times by various sanskrit scholars. The CA state board's recent recommendation of his letter is another proof of the same. >I didn't save them so can't give examples, other > than one which claims that Vedic culture is hundreds of thousands of years old. While I dont buy such claims, Witzel's claims and intepretations are as ridiculous as claims like above. Many indologists consider him a joke. > This Mr. Kalyanaraman gotten into trouble for misrepresentations more than once on several scholarly listservs, and this article is one more instance. I myself do not agree with some of his interpretations but the article has nothing to do with those interpretations of his. It is always a good idea to read well before responding to something. The article talks about what Witzel did recently which is known to the public. Your statements bear no relation to the content of the article. Among other things what he did, he blatantly lied to the government in his letter. He asked some of his lackeys to sign his letter. One of these guys had a PhD in Engineering while his letter shows a PhD in Indology. He lied like this so that the state board thinks many indologists are supporting him. We dont need to support liars like Witzel. Btw, discussions on misrepresenting Hindus( of which shAkta system is part of) is way much better than discussion on feminism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2005 Report Share Posted December 26, 2005 >Did you read the article? You wont be saying this if you did. Yes, I did; that is why I am saying it. I have no desire to argue this subject. I have voiced my protest and will leave it at that. >Btw, discussions on misrepresenting Hindus( of which shAkta system >is part of) is way much better than discussion on feminism Whatever. Max -- Max Dashu Suppressed Histories Archives Global Women's History http://www.suppressedhistories.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2005 Report Share Posted December 30, 2005 This textbook controversy is a pretty contentious topic; the emotional intensity surrounding it hasn't made for very clear reporting (in my opinion, anyway.) Here are interviews with two of the principles, for those who might be trying to understand the issues: Hindu American Foundation counsel Suhag A. Shukla 'I am not for rewriting Hinduism' The Rediff Interview December 29, 2005 http://in.rediff.com/news/2005/dec/29inter1.htm Harvard Professor Michael Witzel 'I am not a Hindu hater' The Rediff Interview December 30, 2005 http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/dec/30inter1.htm More information: The Pluralism Project (California textbooks) http://www.pluralism.org/news/index.php? xref=California+Textbook+Controversy&sort=DESC or http://tinyurl.com/cp69f Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.