The BBC on "AIT"

[Guest guest]

I should like to draw list-users' attention to the following section of the

BBC website. It is the BBC's official account of the history of Hinduism. I

would suggest that some represenations need to be made to the BBC in order

to produce a more accurate account:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/history/index.shtml

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/history/history5.shtml

 

 

 

====

This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. It may contain private and

confidential information. If you are not the intended addressee, please take

no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone. Please reply to this e-mail

to highlight the error. You should also be aware that all electronic mail

from, to, or within Northumbria University may be the subject of a request

under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and related legislation, and

therefore may be required to be disclosed to third parties.

This e-mail and attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving

Northumbria University. Northumbria University will not be liable for any

losses as a result of any viruses being passed on.

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, Paul Barlow <paul.barlow@u...>

wrote:

>

> I should like to draw list-users' attention to the following

section of the

> BBC website. It is the BBC's official account of the history of

Hinduism. [...]

 

Interesting. That shows (a) that the mass media in Britain are

estranged from the academic establishment, (b) that the complaints

of the Indian ultra-right about the grand conspiracy of the

distorting of Indian history by the Western academic establishment

at the behest of the governments of their countries in order to

intellectually confuse supposedly hapless Indians and thereby

humiliate and exploit them, are false.

 

It would rather seem that the BBC is either infested by hardcore

Hindutvavadis and / or their sympathizers, or we are dealing with a

new type of conspiracy: that an agency financed by the British

government is instrumentalized to toe the revisionist line of the

political extreme right of a country that was recently dismissed in

general elections in that country. But somehow, I think this second

possibility is bit unlikely. :-) Or perhaps this is the doing of a

naive and uncritical, easily impressionable employee in a position

of more responsibility than s/he can handle, who was influenced by

the wrong people to put that material on the website.

 

Perhaps somebody (a Briton) can draw up a letter to the BBC, to be

signed by concerned persons, pointing out the need of rectifying

that irrationality?

 

RZ

[Guest guest]

what do you have to say about this ?

 

visit this page

 

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/death_of_the_aryan_invasion_theory.htm

 

Rgds

Unni

INDOLOGY, "Robert Zydenbos" <indologist@o...>

wrote:

>

> INDOLOGY, Paul Barlow <paul.barlow@u...>

> wrote:

> >

> > I should like to draw list-users' attention to the following

> section of the

> > BBC website. It is the BBC's official account of the history of

> Hinduism. [...]

>

> Interesting. That shows (a) that the mass media in Britain are

> estranged from the academic establishment, (b) that the complaints

> of the Indian ultra-right about the grand conspiracy of the

> distorting of Indian history by the Western academic establishment

> at the behest of the governments of their countries in order to

> intellectually confuse supposedly hapless Indians and thereby

> humiliate and exploit them, are false.

>

> It would rather seem that the BBC is either infested by hardcore

> Hindutvavadis and / or their sympathizers, or we are dealing with

a

> new type of conspiracy: that an agency financed by the British

> government is instrumentalized to toe the revisionist line of the

> political extreme right of a country that was recently dismissed

in

> general elections in that country. But somehow, I think this

second

> possibility is bit unlikely. :-) Or perhaps this is the doing of a

> naive and uncritical, easily impressionable employee in a position

> of more responsibility than s/he can handle, who was influenced by

> the wrong people to put that material on the website.

>

> Perhaps somebody (a Briton) can draw up a letter to the BBC, to be

> signed by concerned persons, pointing out the need of rectifying

> that irrationality?

>

> RZ

>

[Guest guest]

Robert ,

 

Missed some links . Here are they

 

http://www.sol.com.au/kor/16_01.htm

 

http://www.gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html/vedic-upanisads/aryan-

invasion.html

 

http://www.bharatvani.org/books/ait/

 

Rgds

Unni

INDOLOGY, "Robert Zydenbos" <indologist@o...>

wrote:

>

> INDOLOGY, Paul Barlow <paul.barlow@u...>

> wrote:

> >

> > I should like to draw list-users' attention to the following

> section of the

> > BBC website. It is the BBC's official account of the history of

> Hinduism. [...]

>

> Interesting. That shows (a) that the mass media in Britain are

> estranged from the academic establishment, (b) that the complaints

> of the Indian ultra-right about the grand conspiracy of the

> distorting of Indian history by the Western academic establishment

> at the behest of the governments of their countries in order to

> intellectually confuse supposedly hapless Indians and thereby

> humiliate and exploit them, are false.

>

> It would rather seem that the BBC is either infested by hardcore

> Hindutvavadis and / or their sympathizers, or we are dealing with

a

> new type of conspiracy: that an agency financed by the British

> government is instrumentalized to toe the revisionist line of the

> political extreme right of a country that was recently dismissed

in

> general elections in that country. But somehow, I think this

second

> possibility is bit unlikely. :-) Or perhaps this is the doing of a

> naive and uncritical, easily impressionable employee in a position

> of more responsibility than s/he can handle, who was influenced by

> the wrong people to put that material on the website.

>

> Perhaps somebody (a Briton) can draw up a letter to the BBC, to be

> signed by concerned persons, pointing out the need of rectifying

> that irrationality?

>

> RZ

>

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, "Robert Zydenbos" <indologist@o...>

wrote:

>

> INDOLOGY, Paul Barlow <paul.barlow@u...>

> wrote:

> >

> > I should like to draw list-users' attention to the following

> section of the

> > BBC website. It is the BBC's official account of the history of

> Hinduism. [...]

>

> Interesting. That shows (a) that the mass media in Britain are

> estranged from the academic establishment, (b) that the complaints

> of the Indian ultra-right about the grand conspiracy of the

> distorting of Indian history by the Western academic establishment

> at the behest of the governments of their countries in order to

> intellectually confuse supposedly hapless Indians and thereby

> humiliate and exploit them, are false.

>

 

S. Gurumurthy's views about the BBC website on AIT:

http://news.indiainfo.com/columns/guru/103105bbc-vivekananda.html

 

 

N. Ganesan

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY, "Unnikuttan" <unniv> wrote:

>

> Robert ,

>

> Missed some links . Here are they

>

> http://...

 

The list could be extended probably indefinitely, since the same

material is repeated innumerable times in countless webpages without

ever becoming more substantial or convincing. Always the same stuff,

the same lame conspiracy theories, the same kinds of people

propagating them.

 

Since such postings keep recurring, perhaps it is good to repeat a few

simple rules one should apply when seeing such web pages and other

'information' on the internet.

 

Rule 1: When a web page attempts to overwhelm the reader with a

bewildering heap of strange, supposed 'facts' in an attempt to whip up

hateful sentiments of a religious / ethnic / racialist / political

nature - ignore it.

 

Rule 2: Any page that shouts out against a 'myth' (for instance:

'Aryan invasion') and then immediately proposes a new myth as 'the

truth' (usually religious, political, or combined: for instance,

Hindutvavadi) should be ignored - unless you consider it your job to

investigate religious fundamentalist politics.

 

Rule 3: Any writing that itself is insufficiently explicit in its

argumentation and draws on supposed 'authorities' that are religious

preachers and / or political activists, should be ignored.

 

Rule 4: When in some internet forum any activist / propagandist tries

to draw you into a protracted 'debate' (in an attempt to whip up

hateful sentiments of a religious / ethnic / racialist / political

nature and thereby obscure the intellectual issue) - ignore him / her.

Unless you think it's fun and you really have nothing better to do for

the moment.

 

The problem with the internet is that literally anyone who can punch a

few keys on a computer keyboard can post material somewhere at little

or no cost. In other words: the trivial fact that something is found

on the internet means absolutely nothing. (Therefore I tell my

students: DO NOT GOOGLE SOME STUFF TOGETHER AS A POOR SUBSTITUTE FOR

REAL STUDY. The fact is that a bit of web browsing cannot take the

place of years of disciplined study - if one is seriously interested

in gaining a well-founded, balanced grasp of complex subjects, based

on a thorough understanding rather than on a few slogans. Instead of

reading a few pages on some website of unclear standing and quality,

go to a decent academic library and read a few hundred pages in some

real books - and never, never switch off your mind, and always keep it

open. Some training in research methodology is also recommended.)

 

There was a time when I thought it could be useful to engage obscure

'critics', esp. when they directly wrote something against me or my

colleagues. I stopped doing that (following rule 4 above), because

life is short and one wants to use it for doing something constructive

and of lasting value. My following pages:

 

http://ca.geocities.com/zydenbos2001/laermendepolemik.html

http://ca.geocities.com/zydenbos2001/z2elst.html

 

illustrate what sort of nonsense goes about in journalism as well as

on the internet, what the general style of such discussions is, and

how tiresome it is to combat it.

 

For examples of what revisionist 'scholars' do and how they are

exposed, see:

 

http://ca.geocities.com/zydenbos2001/horseplay.pdf

http://ca.geocities.com/zydenbos2001/thapar.pdf

http://ca.geocities.com/zydenbos2001/taleoftwohorses.pdf

 

Sincerely,

 

Prof. Dr. Robert J. Zydenbos

Department for Asian Studies, Institute of Indology

University of Munich

Germany

[Guest guest]

> For examples of what revisionist 'scholars' do and how they are

> exposed, see:

 

but such "exposure" doesn't necessarily mean that pro-ait advocates

are right.

 

it only means that somebody screwed up in their anti-ait argument.

 

the tendency of indological scholars to present "facts" as though they

are indisputable should be tempered.

 

after all we've little conclusive evidence about the ancient past in

india. so best to keep an open mind about all possibilities.

 

nandakumar