Ilaiah views

[chittimallu2]

Just now, dakumangalsingh said:

What are his other two books ankul ? 

I read his "being different" and "Indra's net".... ee book inka avvale and then there is "The battle for sanskrit" next in line

[reality]

4 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

aa book oka 600 pages untundi.. neeku 2 lines lo ela cheppamantav.... reading alavatu opika lekapothe vadhilei... its basically about how many forces are breaking india internally and also through external help/influence

Sincere question re, I know your posts...

Offcouse, British taught us nicely how to divide and rule, which is quite unfortunate for the genuinely GREATEST COUNTRY on earth..

I got the answer to my question...Thanks

[dakumangalsingh]

2 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

I read his "being different" and "Indra's net".... ee book inka avvale and then there is "The battle for sanskrit" next in line

How are they 

what are they about 

 

[uttermost]

29 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

ee topic interest unnollu ee book chadavandi... I rate rajiv malhotra very highly and he rips the theories of assholes like ilaiah in this book.. nenu motham inka chadavaledu, konchemey chadiva but I read two other books by RM... fantastic author

 

 

may be you should read Kancha Ilaiah too, to make a reasoned judgement.

The difference between RM and KI is that Kancha is a scholar, whereas RM seems to be among those fly by night salesmen for Hindutva.

Don't get me wrong, there was a time when I thought RM was decent (he was never a scholar). He atleast had the courtesy to hear the other side's point of view and be respectful with his arguments. But, like Prof. Balagangadhara, the left's consistent attacks on Indian culture have disillusioned him, and  delivered him to the devil's arms i.e. mainstream Hindutva.

Also, I distinctly remember you being a bit enthusiastic about the North-South divide not so long ago. Can you think of any other ideology that inspired this divide other than Dravidian hypothesis?

Can you be for and against the same thing? I'm curious.

[reality]

Just now, uttermost said:

may be you should read Kancha Ilaiah too, to make a reasoned judgement.

The difference between RM and KI is that Kancha is a scholar, whereas RM seems to be among those fly by night salesmen for Hindutva.

Don't get me wrong, there was a time when I thought RM was decent (he was never a scholar). He atleast had the courtesy to hear the other side's point of view and be respectful with his arguments. But, like Prof. Balagangadhara, the left's consistent attacks on Indian culture have disillusioned him, and  delivered him to the devil's arms i.e. mainstream Hindutva.

Also, I distinctly remember that you being a bit enthusiastic about the North-South divide not so long ago. Can you think of any other ideology that inspired this divide other than Dravidian hypothesis?

Can you be for and against the same thing? I'm curious.

Welcome back Narsi... 

[uttermost]

24 minutes ago, dakumangalsingh said:

How are they 

what are they about 

 

Check out Rajiv Malhotra's twitter feed. He's a typical NRI, trying to mine gold by exacerbating nativist tendencies in his home country, while enjoying secular environment abroad.

If you are inspired by his twitter arguments, then pick his book up. Good luck.

[chittimallu2]

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

may be you should read Kancha Ilaiah too, to make a reasoned judgement.

The difference between RM and KI is that Kancha is a scholar, whereas RM seems to be among those fly by night salesmen for Hindutva.

Don't get me wrong, there was a time when I thought RM was decent (he was never a scholar). He atleast had the courtesy to hear the other side's point of view and be respectful with his arguments. But, like Prof. Balagangadhara, the left's consistent attacks on Indian culture have disillusioned him, and  delivered him to the devil's arms i.e. mainstream Hindutva.

Also, I distinctly remember that you being a bit enthusiastic about the North-South divide not so long ago. Can you think of any other ideology that inspired this divide other than Dravidian hypothesis?

Can you be for and against the same thing? I'm curious.

my reactions to ilaiah are not knee jerk.... just because he is a professor doesnt make him a scholar since he talks out of his arse... 

You say RM isnt a scholar so i want to know whats your definition of scholar? A PhD? being a professor in a university? RM is not a hindutva agent, he just defends it from outsider's attacks. Not sure if you read any of his books but he never gets on a high horse with respect to Indian culture/philosophy or religion.. he clearly explains how it evolved with times... meaning the old customs were shunned as they arent practical in the modern generations.. he explains how our culture digested many other philosophies and yet maintained the original thread of the fabric... 

Not sure what I commented about north south division.. maybe that was a hypothetical situation discussion I said yes to, or I was being jovial or just my hatred towards congress led states in the north made me say that or I was being just an arse.... I cant recollect to be honest... 

 

[chittimallu2]

5 minutes ago, reality said:

Welcome back Narsi... 

is he narsi/lazy bugger?

[dakumangalsingh]

2 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

my reactions to ilaiah are not knee jerk.... just because he is a professor doesnt make him a scholar since he talks out of his arse... 

You say RM isnt a scholar so i want to know whats your definition of scholar? A PhD? being a professor in a university? RM is not a hindutva agent, he just defends it from outsider's attacks. Not sure if you read any of his books but he never gets on a high horse with respect to Indian culture/philosophy or religion.. he clearly explains how it evolved with times... meaning the old customs were shunned as they arent practical in the modern generations.. he explains how our culture digested many other philosophies and yet maintained the original thread of the fabric... 

Not sure what I commented about north south division.. maybe that was a hypothetical situation discussion I said yes to, or I was being jovial or just my hatred towards congress led states in the north made me say that or I was being just an arse.... I cant recollect to be honest... 

 

This is exactly what I wanted, I have a Christian friend who says Christianity has evolved with times but not Hinduism or Indian culture may be I should read this and try to find answers of my frnds questions 

[dakumangalsingh]

3 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

is he narsi/lazy bugger?

Language suste ardam kavatleda 

[reality]

5 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

is he narsi/lazy bugger?

Doubta...

[chittimallu2]

2 minutes ago, dakumangalsingh said:

Language suste ardam kavatleda 

 

Just now, reality said:

Doubta...

ok... we go along well most of the times... kani thana paragraphs ki nenu reply ivvalenu... chaata bhaarathalu raasthadu page lu page lu 

[uttermost]

1 minute ago, chittimallu2 said:

my reactions to ilaiah are not knee jerk.... just because he is a professor doesnt make him a scholar since he talks out of his arse... 

You say RM isnt a scholar so i want to know whats your definition of scholar? A PhD? being a professor in a university? RM is not a hindutva agent, he just defends it from outsider's attacks. Not sure if you read any of his books but he never gets on a high horse with respect to Indian culture/philosophy or religion.. he clearly explains how it evolved with times... meaning the old customs were shunned as they arent practical in the modern generations.. he explains how our culture digested many other philosophies and yet maintained the original thread of the fabric... 

Not sure what I commented about north south division.. maybe that was a hypothetical situation discussion I said yes to, or I was being jovial or just my hatred towards congress led states in the north made me say that or I was being just an arse.... I cant recollect to be honest... 

RM is at best a cultural historian, whereas KI is a sociologist by training. My definition of a scholar is someone who has published extensively in his line of work, and has been peer reviewed. KI makes the cut, RM doesn't.

Its true that the social academia is heavily left leaning, and someone like RM may have no chance. But prof. Balagangadhara does. He also explores cultural history with a scientific perspective. I mentioned Prof. B, just to make the distinction that I don't brush aside all right wing theoreticians. KI will always be taken more seriously than RM, other than in Hindutva circles.

I haven't read RM, or KI. But I've been to couple RM's lectures at my university 10yrs ago. I was impressionable then, and was definitely persuaded by his arguments about 'outsider' attacks.

I have perused RM's twitter feed, where he picks up fights with all and sundry (I don't hold it against him), but I'm not impressed with the unscientific arguments he makes. 

From the perspective of western academia, RM writes and sounds like a cultural apologist, not a neutral observer of fact. Him not getting on a high horse is precisely one of the ways modern propagandists do it. 

Simple question to you:

what do you treasure more? cultural/national sovereignty or individual liberty? KI gives voice to those whose individual liberty has been traditionally crushed by oppressive forces.

RM apologises for the oppression, but wants the oppressed to move past it.

That's why RM will probably make a good scholar if he choses genetics, where he can prove his cultural theories by deceit, but as a social scholar, he falls flat. He takes the side of the oppressors.

[uttermost]

9 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

 

ok... we go along well most of the times... kani thana paragraphs ki nenu reply ivvalenu... chaata bhaarathalu raasthadu page lu page lu 

ok. I'm s0rry. I won't bother you.

[uttermost]

16 minutes ago, dakumangalsingh said:

This is exactly what I wanted, I have a Christian friend who says Christianity has evolved with times but not Hinduism or Indian culture may be I should read this and try to find answers of my frnds questions 

If Hinduism evolved with times, India wouldn't be poor. Your friend is right and wrong.

Its not christianity that evolved with times, its the protestant faith that did.