Judge for yourself

[aneeshm]

Here's a link to the chapter on Islamic history in the 11th class textbook by the NCERT, which was recently re-toxified by the historians of the JNU.

Link (PDF)

I'd like people here to read it, and tell me if they think its portrayal of Islamic history is unbiased.

( Here's the link to the central page: Link

Go to "Class XI"->"History"->"Themes in World History".)

[Arrian]

I've read parts of it and haven't seen anything that strikes me as particularly unfair or wrong. I'm no expert on Islamic history. I read parts of the Roman Empire section and that was fine too... this is like a high school level text, so it obviously isn't terribly detailed.

Is there something in particular you find objectionable?

What happened to demonstrating the pervasive anti-Brahmin bias in the textbooks? Instead you're after the Muslims again...

-Arrian

[Fake Boris]

My guess is that it's biased if it doesn't depict Mohamad as a bloodthirsty paedophile.

[aneeshm]

I never said it was biased. I'm just looking for opinions on whether or not people think it was biased.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by aneeshm
recently re-toxified by the historians of the JNU.

Originally posted by aneeshm
I never said it was biased.

[aneeshm]

The only thing I found a bit objectionable was the sentence where it was written that "the Kaba was cleansed of idols, because Muslims had to face it" (italics mine). That's a bit like saying that Hitler "cleansed" large parts of Europe of the Jews. It's as if the author thinks idols are something filthy and dirty, and the desecration of the Kaba can be called a "cleansing" because the impure things were removed.

Another bit was the "falling out with the Jews". Many Jews would strenuously object to that simplistic description, because it wasn't a falling out, it was plain genocide, perpetrated out of greed (the Jews were wealthy, and the wealth plundered from them was key to later Muslim success).

Also, during the early period, the conquest of Mecca is not mentioned, only implied. Basically, the "Mohammed persecuted by others" bit is shown in full detail, but "Mohammed persecuting others" is not even hinted at.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by LordShiva

It's a little inside joke, actually. When the BJP was in power, it broke the stronghold the Marxists had on the ICHR and the NCERT.

The media went into a tizzy, alleging all sorts of things - even before the names of the people to be appointed were revealed!

The current government said it would "de-toxify" the textbooks. But people like me humorously refer to it as "re-toxification". The new textbooks go the the perverted extent of calling revolutionary freedom fighters (such as S.C. Bose) "terrorists". Way to go, Arjun Singh!










@ Arrian


The two textbooks which contain the mass of material which I'm looking for - the 10th and 12th books - are currently unavailable in the market. I'll have to wait for them to come out. But a perusal of the others has convinced me that the old bias lingers. That is for mainly three reasons:

a) Castes are treated as a homogeneous entity. They are also rigidly divided into "oppressor" and "oppressed", with no heed being paid to the immense complexity of the old system, which was nothing of the sort of duality which is implied here
b) References to upper castes are only in negative contexts
c) There is NOT ONE SINGLE reference to upper castes in a positive context, or to their contributions, which has to be made if you accept that castes are homogeneous entities


The whole thing is inconsistent and illogical, but because it suits the current political climate and the whims of the current rulers, and because it can be used to divide the country and thereby gain votes, it is peddled.

[Nubclear]

Another aneeshm anti-islam masturbation thread
Oh, I see that he is also on the "my caste is teh superior, it didnt do anything wrong!!!1" bit, too.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Tacc
Another aneeshm anti-islam masturbation thread
Oh, I see that he is also on the "my caste is teh superior, it didnt do anything wrong!!!1" bit, too.

0.1/10

[Heresson]

I don't see anything outrageous, while there are things I don't like:
- Mecca depicted as religious center of Arabia prior to Islam; it is a muslim tradition, but in fact it has no basis.
- Umayyads had "christian advisors in administration" - entire administration was made of local people for first centuries of islam, simply because muslims had no experience of administration of empire. It is even more silly that they admit that greek was the first language of administration...
They omit everything controversial, true.
What's biased is crusades part.
Muslims were conquering the world for booty. Christians out of religious zeal. They do not mention persecution of christians, destruction of Holy Sepulchre, bah, they even write that pilgrims were OK.... the only reason for crusades is according to them neophite zeal, which is strange, taking into accound Hungarians and Slavs didn't participate but few in the crusades, and Normans strictly out of political reasons.

"Hostility towards the Muslim world became more pronounced in the eleventh century".
they say, yet, they do not find conquering most of christian and nearly entire zoroastrian world as anything hostile.

As usually, it was necessary to mention the slaughter of Jerusalem, but to mention slaughter of Antioch, Tripoli, Antioch etc, each city with many times bigger population that Jerusalem, it was not found of any use. I doubt it is anything different in any european book, though
Crusades are blamed on deterioration of relations between christians and muslims, which is true, but what comes to my mind is that when muslims were attacking, converting, etc,. everything was fine. When they are being done the same - it is wrong, so wrong...

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by aneeshm




0.1/10

Indeed, you can't respond to actual criticisms of your beliefs (probably because you think your caste makes you right no matter what), so you dismiss it all as "lol im not going to fall for a troll lol" as if that will somehow convince others of the "false" nature of my characterisation.
Intellectual honesty appears to be a foreign concept to you.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by aneeshm


0.1/10

You keep using that retort. I don't think it means what you think it means.

[Arrian]

Inigo

-Arrian

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Tacc

actual criticisms of your beliefs......
Intellectual honesty......

Originally posted by Tacc

Another aneeshm anti-islam masturbation thread
Oh, I see that he is also on the "my caste is teh superior, it didnt do anything wrong!!!1" bit, too.

If this is the level of criticism I'm facing, then I think that the response was more than justified.

[Arrian]

The only thing I found a bit objectionable was the sentence where it was written that "the Kaba was cleansed of idols, because Muslims had to face it" (italics mine). That's a bit like saying that Hitler "cleansed" large parts of Europe of the Jews. It's as if the author thinks idols are something filthy and dirty, and the desecration of the Kaba can be called a "cleansing" because the impure things were removed.

Terrible analogy. Furthermore, I read that as just being part of an imperfect HS-level textbook's cursory overview of events. If you read the Roman Empire part, I'm sure you could nitpick in similar ways. This is insignificant, AFAIC.

Another bit was the "falling out with the Jews". Many Jews would strenuously object to that simplistic description, because it wasn't a falling out, it was plain genocide, perpetrated out of greed (the Jews were wealthy, and the wealth plundered from them was key to later Muslim success).

I really don't know enough to comment. Perhaps LotM does?

Also, during the early period, the conquest of Mecca is not mentioned, only implied. Basically, the "Mohammed persecuted by others" bit is shown in full detail, but "Mohammed persecuting others" is not even hinted at.

If you say so... I didn't get that vibe.

Now, were I a Hindu nationalist with a chip on my shoulder, I'd probably find fault somewhere...

-Arrian