Hindu Vivek Kendra
A RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE PROMOTION OF HINDUTVA
   

For ignoramus Satiricus ignorance of history is bliss - Organiser

Satiricus ()
July 12, 1998

Title: For ignoramus Satiricus ignorance of history is bliss
Author: Satiricus
Publication: Organiser
Date: July 12, 1998

The trouble with history is that it happened. If that is not
clear enough Satiricus will say the trouble with history is
that it happened the way it happened. If this is still not
clear to fellow-dunces Satiricus will say the trouble with
history is that it happened without caring how it happened.
Now that at least, should be as plain as the wart on
Satiricus nose. Should not history have taken care to see-
that it happened on the scientific and secular lines ordained
by the powers that be? Alas! Thoughtless history did not
take any such care, and so the Indian Council of Historical
Research had to set about the historic task of giving a
rational interpretation of national history. At least that is
what Satiricus understands from the title "Rational versus
National" that a journal has given to its long story on the
recent changes in the ICHR. Now simpleton Satiricus, for
whom ignorance of history is bliss, was under the
impression that there need not be a contradiction between
national and rational, and in fact national history had a
rationale in national ethos. But of course such impressions
are wrong. and righting wrong impressions about history
was the noble mission, in which the ICHR was busy so
long. Will the ignoble people who have now entered it
tarnish that noble mission? That is the fear For this
particular journal's subtitle says, "Right-wing historians
usurp the ICHR." That disturbs Satiricus, but it also puzzles
him. For, he never knew history had wings. And he also
does not know how there can be right-wing historians. And
as for the right-wing "usurping" the ICHR throne it would
automatically mean that the left-wing has the divine right
of kings to that throne. In other words the left wing is the
right wing and the right wing is the wrong wing. Is all this
getting a little too much for Satiricus' bird-brain? Frankly
yes. Especially because the journal's second subtitle says,
"A Hindu national history is but the next step." This is
supposed to be a terrifying prospect, but will anybody
please explain to this dimwit why he should be terrified? A
communal ignoramus that he is, Satiricus thought the
national history of Hindusthan cannot be anything but
Hindu. But then, we no longer live in Hindusthan, we live
in secular India that is incidentally, Bharat, and so we have
to see that national history is made rational history and that
Hindu history is suitably sanitized into secular, scientific,
progressive history. This was the laudable purpose for
which the late Smt Indira Gandhi set up the ICHR. Its
original aim was to give a "rational" direction to historical
research and foster "an objective and scientific writing of
history". This is what the pro-rational journal says, but is
that all? This pro-national (and hence irrational) journal,
for which Satiricus writes, says no, there is something more
- which is something more important. It says, "To foster
objective and scientific writing of history as will inculcate
an. informed appreciation of the country's national and
cultural heritage" was the ideal with which the ICHR was
set up. Good God! Can it be true? Could scientific
rationalism and national heritage mix? That amounts to
saying that what is national can also be rational. Can
Satiricus be anti-national enough to claim that nationalism
can include rationalism? And can Satiricus be irrational
enough to question the concept of rationalism? If history is
the chronicle of human activity, and if a human being is
defined as a bundle of contradictions how rational can
human history be? How rational and scientific was
Mahmud Ghazni when he sent the Somnath idols to
Ghazni, Mecca and Madina for the faithful to; trample
upon them after refusing a lot of wealth that was offered for
sparing the idols? Satiricus does not know but left-wing
historians are expected to. As for scientific writing of
history Satiricus supposes that it pre-supposes science, so
the left-wing historians of ICHR are more or less scientists
of history. But do these scientists know what science is all
about? The other day Satiricus read an article strangely
titled "God through physics", which said ancient Hindu
insight and modern science were converging in their quest
for the ultimate reality. Had this piece not been based on a
Westerner's book Satiricus would have unhesitatingly
dubbed it a horrid attempt at Hinduising science. But the
book actually says that particle physics and quantum
mechanics are coming to the same conclusion's as ancient
Hindu, sages about ultimate reality. This is getting more
and more impossible, because it virtually means that
ultimate left-wing reality is a figment of the left-wing
imagination, and also that what was then Hindu is now
scientific. In other words a Hindu national history does not
have to be written, it is already there, it is quite rational and
it is even scientific. That does it. This scientific perversion
of scientific history writing must be countered at all cost. It
must be firmly and learnedly pointed out that taking pride
in national history is unscientific and irrational and only
that national history is worth reading. which is written by
those who have a long history of betraying the nation.