Shouldn't this be in the history books?

[aneeshm]

When I studied history in school, there was a lot of material provided on the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, in order to show the brutality of the British occupiers of India. However, not a word was said about a much bigger event, the Moplah Rebellion.

If we are to include such extensive coverage of the first, should not the second have at least a passing mention, given that the death toll in the second was almost 17 times higher, without counting the people displaced?

This is the sort of thing I mean when I talk about bias in history writing. It's basically a Marxist circlejerk.

[Last Conformist]

You should be happy that the Raj is in the history books here at all.

[Zkribbler]

Bah! What I learned about India in U.S. schools could fit on a postage stamp.

First, there was the Indus civilization.
Then, it was invaded by Alexander the Great, who didn't conquer but turned around and headed home.
Some European explorer (I forget which) discovered it.
The French and the British fought over it, with the British winning.
There were some tribal uprisings (see, Gunga Din).
Then there was Gandhi and then division into India and Pakistan.

Look at that. It's just friggin' pathetic.

Edit to add: Oh, and would you believe it?! I took "World" History. Apparently, U.S. schools don't consider India to be part of the world.

[rah]

I'm sure your list for central africa would be even shorter.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Bah! What I learned about India in U.S. schools could fit on a postage stamp.

First, there was the Indus civilization.
Then, it was invaded by Alexander the Great, who didn't conquer but turned around and headed home.
Some European explorer (I forget which) discovered it.
The French and the British fought over it, with the British winning.
There were some tribal uprisings (see, Gunga Din).
Then there was Gandhi and then division into India and Pakistan.

Look at that. It's just friggin' pathetic.

No wonder people think ill of India. They just aren't taught much at all, and very few, if any, actually bother to learn more or find out more.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by rah
I'm sure your list for central africa would be even shorter.

But there was no great civilization in Central Africa. It was just a tribal area. Pre-Colonia India had an advanced, extensive civilization.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by aneeshm
No wonder people think ill of India.

I don't know anyone who thinks ill of India. Here, it's viewed as far away, maybe mysterious, frighteningly overcrowded, poverty-stricken and usually irrelevant.

Every once in awhile, I hear grumbling about "our jobs" being exported to India but any hostility is aimed at the corporations doing it, not at India or Indians.

[KrazyHorse]

What the **** is the matter with ****ing Hindooo nationalists? Quoting from the Wikipedia article:

It is important to note that the Moplah riots came just after the all-India Khilafat agitation supported by Muslim leaders and Mahatama Gandhi to avoid the elimination of the Islamic Caliphate. The Islamic caliphate was eventually abolished in 1924 by Mustafa Kemal Attaturk the dictator, strongman and father of Modern Turkey. When Attaturk did that he "pulled out the rug" from the whole Khilifat movement. This offers a strong indication that a large section of the Moplahs also saw the affair as a jihad or holy war against the British. But Hindus(kafirs) were target and killed. Nearly 30,000 hindus were killed, thousands of innocent hindu women were raped and thousands converted forcibly.

The reduction of the Moplah rebellion to only a farmers vs. landlords issue is a leftist/communist interpretation of history that gives every human conflict the colour of a class struggle -- oppressed peasants and workers revolting against the parasitic landlords and industrialists -- while refusing to recognize any other motive like religion, ethnicity or racialism.

[snoopy369]

As opposed to the grumbling about our jobs being exported to Mexico, which is largely directed at mexicans?

[DinoDoc]

I just wish there were more study of the origins of the Hindu civilization.

[Spiffor]

Re: Shouldn't this be in the history books?

Originally posted by aneeshm
This is the sort of thing I mean when I talk about bias in history writing. It's basically a Marxist circlejerk.

I must have missed something. Since when is ti marxist not to denounce the horrors wrought for the sake of religion or colonialism?

As to the figures, do you have a serious source? Considering your last thread on the issue (the Goa massacres IIRC), I take your figures with a truckload of salt now.

[KrazyHorse]

I like how every wikipedia page dealing with Indian history has obviously been written by a bunch of rabid hindu nationalists.

The sad thing is that they don't realise how little anybody else cares.

[Lorizael]

Shouldn't this be in the history forum?

[KrazyHorse]

Can we please have a separate forum to discuss the origins of Hindu "civilisation"?

[Heresson]

Re: Shouldn't this be in the history books?

No, it should not.
Next question, please