[neilk]

I have no idea exactly how much this particular curriculum change is influenced by religion. But your assertion that science is depoliticized in India is very wrong.

In 2018, the education minister declared Darwin was wrong. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/23/indian-educati...

This is just one of many such troubling incidents, including apparent indifference to the murder of pro-rationalism academics.

Anecdotally, if you have people from India in your life, this is inescapable. Constant barrage of forwards on WhatsApp of Hindu supremacy, which necessarily have to flip history upside down. The story goes that Hindus had nuclear energy 10,000 years ago, but filthy foreigners corrupted Mother India.

[captn3m0]

> By the 2021-2022 academic year, Darwin’s theory was quietly removed from the examination syllabus for the students of Class 9 and Class 10. By 2022-2023, the topic of evolution was completely purged from school textbooks, teachers and education experts told Al Jazeera.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/4/14/mughals-rss-evoluti...

[rhaway84773]

> The story goes that Hindus had nuclear energy 10,000 years ago, but filthy foreigners corrupted Mother India.

I’ve never understood this kind of messaging. You see it in all sorts of supremacists.

But how is it a credit to you and your ancestors that they had the ability to create nuclear power or fly, etc and then they just lost it!

That’s a sign of deep shame. The particular group of people you’re claiming are superior are so incompetent they weren’t even able to keep knowledge they already had.

Seems like the group of people you think are so superior have been getting dumber with every generation and you therefore are the dumbest of your lineage.

What’s there to be proud of about that?

[godelski]

It's also like bragging that you were a highly advanced civilization and got conquered/occupied by a bunch of dumb savages. There's a few more prominent countries that follow similar narratives and I agree with you that it sounds far more embarrassing than boasting. And if you're superior then why haven't you caught up or surpassed the others? I can understand if this is like <100 years but longer than that feels embarrassing and counter to the superiority narrative.

As to why it works, I completely understand. We just want reasons to feel superior. It is why in high school jocks define metrics as strength and why nerds define metrics as intelligence. It's why we have "well I have street smarts" and other things like that.

[kamaal]

>>It's also like bragging that you were a highly advanced civilization and got conquered/occupied by a bunch of dumb savages.

They explain that part by using the idea of 'traitors'. They are often the minorities of that land(whom they currently hate, and serve as a nice punching bag in the whole process, and in the overall scheme of hate process).

The 'traitor' part is like a constant theme in these stories. Super advanced ancestors, but also very nice, accommodating to everyone. Some savages from the outside invade, traitors help them from inside. Savages win, they are colonised. Traitors benefit. The monuments, symbols and anything to do with the traitors is now demonised and the 'treason' is used as a casus belli for a genocide/ethnic cleansing.

[renewiltord]

Quite similar, in that respect, to the Vietnam War. The "We would have won if it weren't for the people back home who stopped us from fighting" stance, for instance.

[nickcotter]

It’s a popular gambit in various guises:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stab-in-the-back_myth

[duskwuff]

The corollary story that usually shows up is that Westerners "stole" scientific discoveries from India and suppressed them while the country was under occupation. There's a fairly standard example of this at:

https://pparihar.com/2017/05/22/modern-inventions-stolen-fro...

And the BBC reported on some instances of this sort of thought at the Indian Science Congress in 2019:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-46778879

[godelski]

But how is knowledge "stolen"? I understand in the context of piracy, but like piracy you can't really remove it from the originator. Sure, you can take and destroy all books you can find, but it is also pretty easy to make new books (and hide them) or pass knowledge through word of mouth (or hidden in stories). Wouldn't a highly intelligent society be able to accomplish such a simple feat that's been demonstrated by hundreds of civilizations through historY?

[duskwuff]

I didn't say the narrative made sense! But I think the implication was that there was some sort of systematic campaign to erase Indian records of that knowledge after "stealing" it, i.e. by destroying artifacts and written records, preventing word-of-mouth transmission of history, etc. Of course this is all nonsense, but it's nonsense which plays well to an audience which is open to nationalist, anti-imperialist messages.

[rovolo]

I agree that all of the example in the blog post and bbc article are nonsense. However, I think that you're slightly wrong in this statement:

> I think the implication was that there was some sort of systematic campaign to erase Indian records of that knowledge

The blog post is more specific than "Indian records". The blog post is talking about the Vedas in particular. I don't know much about the Vedas, but this looks a lot more like biblical literalism to me. The references to the Raj and to stolen knowledge are used to bolster the Vedas as a primary source of truth.

> Even by today’s standards, if properly applied, these Vedic Sutras can create most advanced technological instruments and mammoth machines ever known to mankind.

> Science expanded its views in the area of observation as well. Thomas Edison developed the light bulb and the motion picture based on Vedic principles. Sun rays emitting illusory rainbows, speed of light and its composition are all explained in Vedas. The idea that light defines or makes our universe visible can be found as explained by Shrila Prabhupada in his purport to SB 2.9.4 “In the darkness one cannot see the sun, nor himself, nor the world. But in the sunlight one can see the sun, himself and the world around him.”

FWIW, I think that it's pretty straightforward to suppress knowledge though. You can record knowledge into books, but it's not really known if no-one is reading the books or using that knowledge. You can suppress metal-working know-how by eliminating metal-working jobs. The Raj had a profound control over India which affected the available areas of work, which would affect what people wanted to learn. You don't have to explicitly ban a topic to make people not want to study that topic.

[andybak]

That first link is a gateway to a whole level of insanity I had no idea about.

[neilk]

Humiliation is essential to any fascist project. You can see this in any of the statements from fascist and authoritarian leaders. They’ll emphasize how tricky and duplicitous the enemies are, how the good and honest people were defrauded, but now they’re exacting revenge.

[hef19898]

The Dolchstoß legend lives on in various forms.

[davchana]

Its crazy man. There is constant barrage of world's best prime minister, best food, best flag, bext xyz declared by NASA/UNO/AMERICA and stuff. Anything tou can think of, its best is in India as per that whatspap forwards & university. If you agree, good. If you object based on facts, you are anti national, anti Hindu. Really crazy.

[jackmott42]

It doesn't matter if a story makes sense, just that it is easy to understand. See much of rhetoric in America right now, and Russia regarding Ukraine.

[renewiltord]

Haha, it's funny but that's the story they go with. There's also great anger in India for "paid conversions" where Christian missionaries give people money and resources if they'll become Christian. Ultimately, it seems reasonable that you go with the god who serves you best.

[godelski]

Reminds me of the story of Job. I'm not sure how people read it any other way than Satan pulling a fast one over God. How is it not a story where Satan tricked God into torturing Job?

[xeonmc]

To lose one civilization may be regarded as a misfortune. To lose two looks like carelessness.

[alephnerd]

Slightly pedantic, but Satya Pal Singh wasn't Minister of Education.

That said, the rest is true.

[dmix]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satya_Pal_Singh_(Uttar_Pradesh...

Strange how a former police officer gets a gov job with influence over higher education. He called himself a “man of science” but his entire career was police work with a bit of politics at the tail end.

He was “minister of state” [1] for the Ministry of Human Resource Development which apparently was renamed the Ministry of Education after he left.

[1] Google tells me that’s an assistant/junior role to the actual Minister.

[alephnerd]

Minister of State is a generic executive position that is created to reward medium level politicians.

Satyapal Singh specifically helped the BJP win over the Jat community in Western Uttar Pradesh which before 2014 voted for the RLD (a Jat primary party in western UP, Rajasthan, and Haryana).

By rewarding him, with a low level backbench minister position, he can provide patronage to the rest of his patronage network.

He also tried to save Amit Shah+Modi's political skin during the Ishrat Jahan encounter killing case while he was part of the IPS.

Indian politics is heavily based on micro-level community based calculations because of how close elections are in India (most elections are decided within 5,000 votes ie. one town). Due to this, caste, family, and regional patronage networks form, and this is common across all parties (INC, BJP, etc).

For example, Modi rose to power in Gujarat by helping organize a Dalits+Tribal+Urban coalition in the 1980s and 90s at the expense of a combined Muslim+Patel voting bloc. This same template Modi used is what the BJP has been using since 2014 (intersectionality of identity based on Hinduism ie. Hinduvta).

And the same thing happened in Satyapal Singh's area during the Muzaffarnagar/Shamli riots when the Dalit Hindu + Dalit Muslim voter bloc split due to communal violence, leading to Hindu Dalits leaving the BSP for the BJP, Hindu Jatts leaving the RLD for BJP, and Dalit Muslims leaving the BSP to support the Samajwadi Party because there was no other viable party left in Western Uttar Pradesh.

I am not a fan of the BJP, but you got to hand it to them - they are probably the only national party in India with a strong understanding of subaltern power struggles and micro-level demographic data. Anyone in the INC who knew this stuff defected to the BJP by 2019 anyhow, but might defect back to the INC assuming the right PM candidate is selected (Gehlot would be a strong competitor against Modi, RG would have a hard time)

[1024core]

I, on the other hand, can't stand when people cherry-pick facts to try and make a point.

The INC is doing the same caste/tribe based division of power that you accuse the BJP of. Have you seen the list of ministers in the latest Karnataka cabinet: https://thefederal.com/states/south/karnataka/karnataka-cabi... ?

[alephnerd]

From my post

> Due to this, caste, family, and regional patronage networks form, and this is common across all parties (INC, BJP, etc)

[wrycoder]

He seems to be an upstanding and popular fellow, but sadly lacking in scientific education. Seems strange for India.

[BrandoElFollito]

India is not alone. We have a well-known rapper in France who recently explained how the Egyptian pyramides were something something electricity generators and that Egyptians had electricity thousand of years ago.

This was relayed on TikTok and other platforms to the point where some gov't official had to say that this is bullshit.

[buildbot]

As they are landing pads for Goa'uld, they probably do have some power generation capability.

More seriously, a French wrapper is just that and not the government in any capacity.

[cafard]

What arm of the French government did this rapper represent?

[carlmr]

He said represent in public a few times and people thought he's a public representative!

[anticodon]

> but filthy foreigners corrupted Mother India.

Isn't this part actually true, because Britain pillaged India for centuries?

[godelski]

This is complicated. I mean, first you gotta ask what India even is. From a purely border perspective (this is the important context) it is no different than any other country[0] (play videos for other regions). Current borders only exist since 1950. The longest stable period of Indian borders (and largest) were actually under English occupation. Prior to this the largest empire was the Maurya Empire, which covered Pakistan, Nepal, and Bangladesh but did not reach the southern point of modern India. They didn't even hold this for 100 years. Mughal Empire might be the next best example, but was far later and similarly didn't hold for long.

But this is the history of every region/country. There aren't realistically countries that are thousands of years old, only centuries (and not as how we think of them). But this isn't politically popular. Similarly is that a small force can't occupy a region without significant levels of collusion with local players[1]. English occupation influenced Indian unification as it also unified adversaries and caused competing groups to align to a more important goal. We like to paint stories of ancient cultural heritage, but this is all very fuzzy and extremely messy. Many cultures can claim inventions as borders drastically shifted over the centuries. I think a lot of this just has to do with are limited context windows and that it is hard to codify these timeframes and the complexities of establishing borders (obviously along with political narratives and propaganda). But it also should say a lot about the modern world and why Long Peace is such a big thing (very recent thing btw).

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QN41DJLQmPk

[1] I need to be clear that this doesn't justify or excuse in any way occupation. It doesn't dismiss the brutalities and injustices. It is more about how while the dominant blame belongs to the ruling/occupying class, that we must be careful to not let this blame let local players be swept under the rug, as they play a critical role and local populations have more influence on these actors. It is about nuance and a warning, not an excuse.

[ta_vf7xjd34cc]

> you gotta ask what India even is

One, or all, of the following:

* the subcontinent

* the civilization and peoples that made the subcontinent its home

* the borders and the political entity in control of those borders (past, present, future)

The British did not create the civilization or the religions they found when they landed here.

The didn't build the temples, or compose the Vedas, the Upanishads, the Itihasas, the Puranas, or the various dharma shastras.

And Indian people didn't emerge out of British vaginas.

The idea that India didn't exist before the British (a lot of people claim this) is nonsensical. The only claim one can make is that they became, for a time, Chakravartin.[1] They were not the first, and they won't be the last.

> They didn't even hold this for 100 years.

Powers (the State) and areas enclosed by the borders it claims and governs (the political boundaries; the country) are always ephemeral things. Be it 100 years or 1000 years, they will change.

For most people, this has only been relevant in so far as the impact it has on their daily lives. Does the State interfere in their religious, social, personal and economic affairs? To what extent? Does it protect them from insiders and outsiders who attempt to do the same? To what extent? These are the only questions that matter.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakravarti_(Sanskrit_term)

[buildbot]

Couldn't the same be said for the dominant group before and after? Honestly asking, but looking through the history, that area has been in turmoil a long time, which is true of most places. And also does not excuse imperialism either of course.

[pfannkuchen]

I don’t recall any accounts of the British finding nuclear power when they arrived though…

[godelski]

Or the British suspiciously inventing nuclear weapons/power relatively quickly after the occupation of India. Or even when they began trading. Nor the Greeks. But maybe the British were just playing the long con. Well played British... well played. Waiting a hundred years, giving the technology to the Americans, and letting Germany bomb your cities and almost occupy your country. Very crafty.

[simonh]

The British Raj is why Hindus lost nuclear technology 10,000 years ago?

[carlmr]

Yes, but there's usually a lot of magic thinking involved about technology that supposedly got lost, but in actuality nobody had at that time.

[neilk]

It’s absolutely true, and even in the sense of losing technology.

The effect of British rule on India is sometimes called “de-industrialization”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-industrialisation_of_India?...

The British had a deliberate policy of extracting raw materials and flooding the market with machine-manufactured goods. The British markets were not open to Indian manufacturers. So not only was India de-industrialized, but many rare skills and techniques were lost during this period. I can’t find a reference, but I remember reading an early British East India Conpany account of encountering silk of such fine quality that yards of it could be folded into a tiny box. Those workers would have been put out of business by the British, and their skills lost for generations. Might be a legend but I’m sure many things like that happened.

It’s just not things like rockets or nuclear weapons.

[brobdingnagians]

In the West, any attempt to debate science is declared to be anti-science, which eventually suffocates science. Conformity to the party line is the ticket to funding (from the political establishment) and acclaim. Are there anti-science people? Sure, but far fewer than the knee jerk reactionists say there are. And someone who goes around calling everyone anti-science without logical basis is antithetical to scientific debate and advancement.

Let us remember where a lot of "scientific" funding comes from, the politicians and Uncle Sam; which inherently tends to corrupt the "science" to become political.

[andybak]

Holup. You're referring to something specific, methinks?

I don't recall much of this in cosmology, organic chemistry or behavioural ornithology.

[godelski]

There needs to be some added context to this. Many anti-science advocates mask as "just asking questions." This was the whole Koch strategy over climate change (they didn't invent it though) where they exaggerated uncertainties in data/conclusions. These always exist, they are called error bounds, but can be quite nuanced. It is easy to bastardize scientific language, which is different than laymen (and why it is possible, though noisy, to identify scientists on semi-anonymous forums like this one).

> Let us remember where a lot of "scientific" funding comes from, the politicians and Uncle Sam; which inherently tends to corrupt the "science" to become political.

Which this is a flag about your political beliefs and lack of experience. It just doesn't follow the practicality of the situation. Neither democrats nor republicans control government science. If you look at DOE secretaries you'll see their party affiliation matches the sitting president. In the labs, there are a lot of political diversity (including a need to ban news being played in the cafeterias because it led to fighting). It is far from monolithic and it's absurd to paint it with a wide brush. You also need to decouple the science (what's being published) from what becomes political narratives (news/directions from secretaries). Gov scientists frequently publish works contrary to the normal political narratives (even of the agency) and if they are prevented from publishing leaks happen pretty quickly.

Some science itself is innately connected to politics (others "aren't"[0]: e.g. cosmology or particle physics). The question is how science should be participating (leading, participating, or auxiliary). You invent new technologies that affect societies and governments... govern societies. You find information that affect citizens and of course this is going to affect policy (e.g. climate change). Of course there are going to be biases, but there is less than what you'd find in an industry. Government science is different, especially since the focus is far less profit motivated (the scientists also aren't making much and can make far more in industry if they are profit motivated). While not ideal, gov science should be a third party verification of information. As an example, looking at climate again, you look at the results of 3 (not independent) different groups: gov, industry, academia (influenced by both gov and industry). If gov + academia comes to a consensus, industry agrees with data but not conclusions, then there's reason to distrust the industry conclusions as there's profit incentives. Your comment is destructive because it has been the narrative that has led to industry capture and manipulation. We've seen it in leaded gasoline, cigarettes, climate change, and many others. No, gov and academia aren't perfect, but this shouldn't result in defaulting to industry opinion or allowing them to dominate narratives. This has to stop.

[0] quotes because money and funding is political, but this is different than conclusions like climate change. Most gov science is in the low politics camp btw.