Home > Unfortunate India > The understanding of Indian History by Colonialists and Marxists is the same!

The understanding of Indian History by Colonialists and Marxists is the same!

Colonialists and Marxists is the same

From Charles Grant (1792), James Mill (1806-1818) and a host of others till 1947 what India witnessed was a one sided, biased and distorted historiography, articulated arrogantly in the words of John Strachey “This is the first and foremost thing to learn about India that there is not, and never was an India, or even any country of India possessing, according to European ideas, any sort of unity- physical, social and religious, no Indian nation, no ‘people of India’, of which we hear so much.”

So successful had been the Colonial psyche at work that the “great revolutionary” thinker Karl Marx could not remain an exception and went to the extent of writing;
“Indian society has no history at all, at least no known history. What we call its history, is but the history of the successive intruders who founded their empires on the passive basis of the unresisting and unchanging society. The question, therefore is not whether the English had a right to conquer India, but whether we are to prefer India conquered by the Turk, by the Persian, by the Russian, to India conquered by the Briton. England had to fulfill a double mission in India; one destructive, the other regenerating—the annihilation of old Asiatic society, and the laying of the material foundations of Western society in Asia.”

These are his words from a write up of July, 22, 1853, so similar to the views of John Strachey. His entire information about India was based on British sources on which he drew his inferences which again reflect the domination of colonial psyche. Though opposed to colonial exploitation his formulations like the “Asiatic Mode of Production”, a “stagnant society” and this being “broken by colonialism”; “oriental despotism”; “passive existence”; “Wild, aimless, unbounded forces of destruction”; “unresistant tools of superstitions”; “brutalizing worship”; “barbarian egotism”; “undignified, stagnant and vegetative life”; “distinctions of caste and slavery” and “never changing natural destiny” (June 25,1853) demonstrate the influence Colonial Psyche had on Marx”. He even wrote “….and thus brought about a brutalizing worship of nature, exhibiting its degradation in the fact that man, the sovereign of nature, fell down on his knees in adoration of Hanuman, the monkey, and Sabbala, the cow.”
Raja and Yetchurry following Marx as regards India !

Content Source from :

Share to all is a platform to share your knowledge and experience.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *