Shrouded Satanism in feudal languages!

When thinking about the pages on Wikipedia about Indian languages, again it is seen that the pages are held hostage by linguistic fanatics. It is a strange world of fanaticism in India. If one were to read the newspapers in Maharashtra, one would have to believe that the people of Maharashtra are the greatest of the people in India. Bombay {actually a British design and creation, and not the current mess designed and maintained by India} is their creation.

If one were to go to Delhi, North India is the best part of India, and South Indians are definitely of a lesser quality. If one were to read Karnataka Newspapers, Kannadigas are the best people with most glorious of heritage. Well, this theme is repeated in almost all states of India, including Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala. The people of Kerala believe with the most passionate conviction that they are the most intelligent people in the world. If their intelligence were not made available to the English nations, most scientific establishments would not have opened there.

These levels of ignorant convictions are deeply connected to a heady fanaticism for state or regional languages. The real fact is that most of these languages made a heady development during the British days. Before that the literary field was occupied and controlled by the traditional feudal classes including the royal houses. Majority people were simply at the level of low level serfs of the landlords maintained at the very lower end of the pejoratives of the feudal language.

For example, in Kerala Malayalam is the official language. However, the modern language of Malayalam is only the traditional language spoken by the small section of people of South Central Travancore. The traditional language of Malabar has been wiped out as this language was made the official language.

Now, loyalty has changed. Many years ago, if anyone in Malabar spoke the official version, he or she would be jeered and sneered at, as a pompous idiot. However, when the official version was enforced through the school textbooks and later given more exposure by the news media and the visual media, the traditional language of Malabar became the tongue of the uneducated. The modern generation view their traditional language with derision.

There is an immensity of words in Malabari language that cannot be understood by the Malayalam speakers.

See this link

I mentioned this fact in a Talk Page in the Wikipedia. Well, I knew that this was an information that the sponsors of Malayalam as the official language would see as a real threat. For they were campaigning to have Malayalam declared as a Classical language like Latin, Sanskrit and Tamil. It was more or less certain that they would achieve their aim. For everything is decided by a small group of persons in the literary circles. They have their own small time loyalties and mutual jealousies. Many languages have tried for this status and I feel that some of them did get this. (Note: Actually the language of Malabar is different from the official language Malayalam)

It is a matter of becoming the cultural leaders of a people. It is like this: Many years ago, when I was in a particular metropolitan city, when creating a Kerala people based book, I was told to write such and such things about a particular person. I was told that he was ‘our cultural leader’. Well, who is that that appoints anyone as a cultural leader? Well, there is a mutual-help caucus that places each one on pre-set slots. It is a closed circle. Outsiders are not allowed. This closed circle decides who are the cultural leaders, who are the Sulthaans, who the deciders of culture and much else. They work in close collaboration with the visual and print media. Everything is connected to the encasing aim of controlling the mind and intellect of the people to condone the doing of a low calibre governing setup, in which the huge majority of the people simply live as economic and social slaves. The people in the caucus remain the Sultans and the fountainheads of the social system.

Digression

Actually the power of language has to be understood like this: Hindi was made the national language of India. It lent a huge economic boost to the Hindi film producers, actors, writers and lyricists. Moreover, almost all national leaders who played out in Hindi achieved national grandeur. Think of such national leaders in India as Subash Chandra Bose, Gandhi, Nehru etc. They played politics in Hindi, and their reputation spread all around the nation. However, there are persons who tried it out from other language areas. But their lack of knowledge in Hindi or the fact that they were contained inside the domains of other languages, limited their grandeur.

Has Hindi really any right to be the national language of India? It has the same right that a Court Jester has to the title of King.

Now, this unwritten code is connected to many fanaticisms including that of language, caste and religion. Now, when I wrote the text about the actual reality of the language called Malayalam, I knew that it was just a matter of time before the text would be deleted. Well, the fact is that what I gave was information. What the administrators at Wikipedia did was to block information. Well, this is the change that had come over Wikipedia India Pages, when it handed over certain control mechanisms to rank third-rate guys with small-time mindset. It is not that the information that I gave should be there, but that correct information should be there, on the main article page.

I have seen many other issues also. For example, the history of the British India and the connected doubtful topics of the Indian Freedom Struggle. The general attitude is to write an anti-British tirade, without any mention of the fervent fact that the British rule was held up by the people of the place. Without their love and loyalty for this rule, it wouldn’t run. This fact is proved true by the fact that almost all people of India who make money want themselves or their children to move to Britain. Well Britain is a place ruled by the British and not by Indians (at least as of now)!

There is this page on Swaraj Movement. It is a said to be a movement to throw out all British goods from British India, and thus promote locally made goods. Well, the truth is that in current-day India, no one has any qualms about using Chinese made goods that has flooded the land.

Now, the Indian historians write without an ounce of pang of conscience or qualm that the Swaraj Movement was supported by the people. Well, these types of figments of their imagination will not be able to fit in with the quote I gave on the concerned Talk Page on Wikipedia: Swadeshi Movement

Shallow textbook history

Naturally I was not there during the swadeshi movement, but then, I live in India, and understand how truths can be twisted. It is an everyday event here.

As to the Swadeshi Movement being a pro-people movement, one needs to take the idea with a pinch of salt. I quote from Home and the World written by Rabindranath Tagore. He was from Bengal and naturally knew what really happened.

Quote from the book: A FEW days later, my master brought Panchu round to me. His __zamindar__, it appeared, had fined him a hundred rupees, and was threatening him with ejectment.

“For what fault?” I enquired.

“Because,” I was told, “he has been found selling foreign cloths. He begged and prayed Harish Kundu, his __zamindar__, to let him sell off his stock, bought with borrowed money, promising faithfully never to do it again; but the __zamindar__ would not hear of it, and insisted on his burning the foreign stuff there and then, if he wanted to be let off. Panchu in his desperation blurted out defiantly: “I can’t afford it! You are rich; why not buy it up and burn it?” This only made Harish Kundu red in the face as he shouted: “The scoundrel must be taught manners, give him a shoe-beating!” So poor Panchu got insulted as well as fined.

“What happened to the cloth?”

“The whole bale was burnt.”

“Who else was there?”

“Any number of people, who all kept shouting __Bande Mataram__. Sandip was also there. He took up some of the ashes, crying: ‘Brothers! This is the first funeral pyre lighted by your village in celebration of the last rites of foreign commerce. These are sacred ashes. Smear yourselves with them in token of your __Swadeshi__ vow.’”

“Panchu,” said I, turning to him, “you must lodge a complaint.”

“No one will bear me witness,” he replied.

“None bear witness?—Sandip! Sandip!”

Sandip came out of his room at my call. “What is the matter?” he asked.

“Won’t you bear witness to the burning of this man’s cloth?”

Sandip smiled. “Of course I shall be a witness in the case,” he said. “But I shall be on the opposite side.”

“What do you mean,” I exclaimed, “by being a witness on this or that side? Will you not bear witness to the truth?”

“Is the thing which happens the only truth?”

“What other truths can there be?”

“The things that ought to happen! The truth we must build up will require a great deal of untruth in the process. Those who have made their way in the world have created truth, not blindly followed it.” —Ved from Victoria Institutions (talk) 11:22, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Digression

If the people of British-India were so much against the British rule, how come a huge number of them fought on the British side during the 1st and 2nd World War? In fact, around 1 million Indian soldiers took part in the 1st World War immediately in the aftermath of the shooting in JallianwalaBagh. If the so-called national spirit was anti-British, how come there was such a feverish support for British war efforts?

The 3 million [30 lakh] Indian soldiers took part in the 2nd World War during the time when Gandhi [in his fervent haste to ward-off media focus from damning stories of his various shady escapades in his ashram started appearing in newspapers inimical to him] was supposed to have let loose a Quit India Movement. Well, this movement began as a whimper and stayed a whimper till the end of the war.

IMAGE: British-Indian soldiers with English soldiers during WW2.

If one were to say that the Indian soldiers fought only for money benefits, well, then that is true for modern Indian soldiers also. However, the fact is that it is recorded by British military leaders that the ‘Indian’ soldiers did exhibit exemplary loyalty to the British war efforts. If this be so, what can one say of the efforts of Bose, to set up an army to support the other side? If they are patriots, well then the soldiers who supported the British war efforts certainly are anti-nationals. Well, such a categorisation is a tragedy. 30 lakh British-Indian soldiers who stood on the British side were antinational? And the 2000 soldiers of the Indian Legion of Subash Chandra Bose were the patriots? To insist such a thing would rank nonsense. 3 million ‘Indian’ soldiers who supported British war efforts were fools?

Subash could get to meet Hitler only after a wait of 18 months. What is that supposed to mean? It literally marks the levels at which he was kept by the German side.

Why should Subash try to intimidate them through a radio broadcast at German behest? Through radio he issued warnings to British-Indian soldiers and police to the effect that unless they assisted the liberation forces (meaning the German side) they would one day have to answer to the free Indian government for their criminal support of the British.

Well, it would be a total travesty to come to an understanding that the huge number of people who supported the British rule here are enemies to this newly made nation.

In fact, when Subash saw himself being treated as a jest in Germany, he simply ditched his soldiers and moved in search of better prospects.

[It may be mentioned in passing that when power was handed over to the newly formed Indian government, the British government had given a huge financial support also. This included a specific amount meant to be given as pension and other benefits to the British-Indian soldiers who had participated in the World War, dead and alive. How much of this was actually distributed to the soldiers who came home after the war is a point for discussion. The extreme treachery of Clement Atlee, the British idiot, will be clear from this. And the inherent impulse to loot and scoot of the Indian politicians will also be seen.]

Fan version history

If one were to go through the various Wikipedia pages of such persons as Indira Gandhi, MK Gandhi, JL Nehru and such other persons, the very clear features that is common in all of them would be the fact that it is not at all encyclopaedic writing, but mere fan versions. Even in the case of Gandhi, the issue is that if one were to focus on life incidences of a person from a hero worship attitude, it may seem that the whole nation pivoted on this individual’s activities.

However, that was not the truth. This would be clear if one were to go through the pages of such small-time local leaders like E K Nayanar, EMS etc. Their various political activism, protect marches, fights with the police and such things may seem to be historical events that changed the nation. However the fact remains that they become significant only when these incidences are given much publicity and magnification by the media and academic textbooks. Otherwise these incidences are just mere dust in the hugeness of everyday political events that take place all over the nation.

Media magnification

I remember one incident when I was moving through Calicut (a big town in South India). Around fifteen people were holding flags and standing across the gateway of a government building. There were two or three cameramen near them. Around ten policemen were also standing near them. Then a most astonishing event happened. The leader said, ‘Okay, let us start’. The cameramen switched on their cameras. The protestors started a very ferocious shouting and thrusting forward.

The policemen, as if given a prompt, jumped on them and started pulling and pushing them, and showed gestures of beating with their lathis (batons). This lasted for around one minute. After that it was all camaraderie, with everyone mutually acknowledging that the shooting had gone well. That night when I was casually going through the TV channels, I saw this event being shown, with the announcement that the members of this political party had protested the issue and were severely beaten up by the police.

The leaders’ faces were shown facing the brunt of the police brutality. As the camera was focused on the few, and the scene lasted only for a few moments, the impression that it gave was of a huge number of people being outside the camera view. The truth was that it was a small event done with cunningly slyness as a political propaganda with active policemen collaboration.

Birdbrains with keyboard

There were other minor issues that I found with various patrollers of the Wikipedia. It is possible that they were all affected by the initial words of the first administrator who at first had believed that it was I who was doing the vandalism on the pages. The truth is that it is obvious that they did not read to the end of the conversation. Such persons who do not have a very judicious mind should not be allowed powers of administration on the pages. For, they are dealing with another person’s words.

Even though they may feel that it is only a matter of typing a few keys, the fact is that when persons write with serious purposefulness, it should not be within the right of small time birdbrains to come and delete their words. It is not a few key strokes that they are deleting, but routes to huge amount of human knowledge.

However, Wikipedia has taken a stand that human knowledge becomes human knowledge only if the academic peers have acknowledged it as ‘right knowledge’. Otherwise, it is only words of a feeble mind! Well, it is not Wikipedia alone that alone has this attitude. It is a universal attitude of most established players, mainly academicians to block information in which they are mere novices. See the block I received from one Physics Forum.

This issue of knowledge peers is quite astonishing. For, the fact is that these so-called peers, who are mainly academicians, really do not know much about how the human body or mind works. Most of the information that they do possess have come from great non-academic mind, even though some of them did do academic teaching to earn a livelihood. These peers do not really have any definite information about how the universe works or what it is composed of. There is information filtering in through academic research works. However, that is only one route for human beings to acquire knowledge. There are other routes also. All persons need not follow this route. Individuals can opt for solitary routes.

However, it is not for Wikipedia workers to categorise them as nuts or cracks. That much politeness has to be extended to solitary researchers. Otherwise many of the human being who came out with fabulous information would have been defined as cracks had Wikipedia been around there then. For example, such names a Sir Isaac Newton, Samuel Hahnemann etc. would be called nuts by Wikipedia employees. In this context, it may be mentioned that Isaac Newton was given Knighthood not for his scientific discoveries, but for his work as the chief of the British Mint. His works gained more acknowledgement after his death.

As to Hahnemann, there is still a hint in the words of Wikipedia that what he discovered is something of a fraud and pseudo science. At least that is the spirit of the Wikipedia article that I read on Homeopathy. And my talk contribution insisting a moderation of this input, was also seen as some sort of vandalism. Well then, what is vandalism? I had believed that it was meant to mean purposeful writing of graffiti and destruction of other’s property. That giving information that is lacking in a supposedly authoritative article is vandalism was news to me.

From WIKIPEDIA: Introducing paragraph on Homeopathy

Homeopathy is a system of alternative medicine originated in 1796 by Samuel Hahnemann, based on his doctrine of similia similibus curentur, according to which a substance that causes the symptoms of a disease in healthy people will cure similar symptoms in sick people. Scientific research has found homeopathic remedies ineffective and their postulated mechanisms of action implausible. Within the medical community homeopathy is considered to be quackery. END OF QUOTE

At least the words that science has no exact means to evaluate this medical system could have been a better alternative. Now, it is just a matter of who writes the article. A person who has had exposure to Homeopathic medicine would have been better writer. The very categorising of medical events that Allopathy cannot understand so Placebo effect is a symptom of a negative mind. As to science, it is doubtful if any scientist can see the software in a Mobile phone, through any scientific observations, other than through the route of software knowledge.

There is an impression that much human knowledge that does not come within the route of modern science is pseudo-science and farce. This is the way that Wikipedia mentions such things as Homeopathy. The general impression is that anyone can write a page. It is not actually possible. And that may be good. However, the general tendency to allow certain sections of people to take a stranglehold of this encyclopaedia is distressing. The blame should not be on Wikipedia, but on the persons who have taken it hostage to propagate their own parochial version of human knowledge.

Formal degrees versus informal knowledge

The problem is that a mere degree in sciences and Arts is seen to be a right or authority over these subjects. The actual fact is that it is not learning the subject that gives them the right to exercise authority over the subject matter. What people, who come to positions of authority to judge and evaluate, should have is a mind that is quite learned in many aspects of human liberty and human dignity. A minimum that I would suggest would be a reading of the complete works of Oscar Wilde including his letters.

These writing do actually contain many routes to mental refinement with regard to tolerance and regard to other people’s rights and qualities. And of refinement in the way to deal with people who are out-of-step or on a different route of command-obedience string. This refinement, not learning in science and arts would give judicious content to their logic. To people who come from non-English feudal languages, this type of learning is quite essential. For, they come from social moods that are quite cantankerous, insecure, jealous and belligerent.

European Colonialism versus English Colonialism

Then there is this streak that I have seen all over Wikipedia. Most of the writings do have a very obvious anti-British colonialism theme embedded in them. It is easily identified as the White Colonialism. However, to a person who has understood what is White Colonialism or European Colonialism, the stark difference it has with British Colonialism is very evident. British (English) Colonialism was the exact opposite of European Colonialism.

Only historians with very feeble historical knowledge would identify British history with that of European history. Every person with profound information in history knows that Britain was the small island that outlived centuries of European belligerence and assault. It is not a nation that caved into European intentions. Everything about Europe is the exact opposite that of Great Britain. Including spiritual leadership.

Currently the whole of US more or less parrots the negativities of Britain, at the same time silently erasing the information that the US was a British-created nation. Not a nation made by Spanish and Portuguese Conquistadors. I first came across the negative mentions of Britain in the US in the year 1999 when I was going through a CD Encyclopaedia called Microsoft Encarta. I was quite surprised when many of the historical details were quite obviously anti-British.

At the same time it was more or less pro persons like Gandhi. I couldn’t at first understand the logic or how this could come about. I get the feeling that Microsoft has made use of low-cost Asian, including Indian, writers and academicians to do much of the writings. These writers write on the basis of their own school textbooks. Now, this is a very dangerous issue. That international history can be written by low quality persons, who don academic titles from low-quality nations. They will definitely create huge mischief in historical knowledge. For, they are the very persons who stand on the feudal heights of their nation, in language, position as well as wealth.

There is a theme in Wikipedia that mentioned pro-European version, pro-Indian version, pro-African version, pro-Asian version etc. Pro-British version is generally mentioned as pro-European, which in itself shows the mediocrity of the persons who does such mention. Now, the issue is that there is really no need to view everything from a pro-somebody version. Versions have to be absolute. For example, a pro-Indian version is not really a pro-Indian people version, but a pro-Indian officialdom and academicians versions. The fact is that both the Indian officialdom as well as the Indian academicians is anti-Indian people.

DIGRESSION

Who are the people spreading all the canard about the British rule in India? Well, it starts from the government officials and the academicians. Who are they? They are the people who have come into the positions vacated by the ancient feudal classes of this geographical area. They loot the people and the land.

Where do they stand in the looting scheme? A peon can get around 15000 to 25000 per month, a clerk up to 30000, a middle level ‘officer’ up to 50000, a professor 75000, and a senior IAS/IPS officer 125000 rupees per month. They all get 13 months salary per year. They are entitled to various other benefits like DA, TA, LTA, Medical bill reimbursement, various incentives for children’s education etc. Beyond all this, they all have huge pension benefits, which include Provident fund, Gratuity and a super loot called Commutation of pension. Commutation of pension literally means that they can collect 7½ years pension together as one lump sum at the commencement of their retirement.

They use their fabulous wealth to set up huge commercial establishments. And to send their children to English nations.

They all have to be addressed and maintained at the highest indicant words of the feudal languages by the people. At the same time, they can address and refer to the common man at the lowest indicant word level. If there is any issue between a government official and a common man, the common man will come out worsted in words and behaviour from the police. A common man’s earnings in India is a on an average between 2000 and 12000 per month. No social security, no pension and not even a respectful level in the language codes. I am not mentioning the miniscule number of people who work in executive jobs in huge corporate companies, who earns beyond 20000 per month.

It is these people who speak ill of the British rule in India. For, they stand in the position of fantastic benefits from the departure of the British. The people have no one to inform them of the other side of facts. Even the media is part of this huge conspiracy to fool the people. END OF DIGRESSION

Anti-British doctoring of history

I have seen so many of such issues. For instance, people who are well-versed in the history of Black slaves from the African west coast, know of the British West African Squadron, which was part of the British navy that went to save the Black slaves from slave trading ships. However, recently in London in an historical exhibition, pictures of the saved slaves were shown on a British ship. There was no mention that they were the saved persons. Most of the viewers received the idea that the slaves were being transported for sale in British ships.

There is this evidence I saw on this website. It mentions a British slave saving ship as a Dutch ship. The deliberate attempt to erase British contribution towards saving the slaves is evident here. Actually, slavery was a phenomenon that existed from time immemorial in all continents including the Americas. Even the Incas and the Mayans had slaves. The Pharaohs had them. All the ‘Indian’ kings had huge number of slaves. The armies of the Mogul kings of ‘India’ were full of slaves who would dig set up the tents and dig the toilets and do much else. Slave dancing girls accompanied them on campaigns. There were slave trading centres in the Middle East. European nations had slaves. When seen in this regard, it may be seen that it was Britain that had the least of slave traditions. In fact, any man considered as a slave would become mentally free the moment he reached inside the shores of England.

See this quote about slaves among the Mayans:

The Maya had a system of serfdom and slavery. Serfs typically worked lands that belonged to the ruler or local town leader. There was an active slave trade in the Maya region, and commoners and elites were both permitted to own slaves. Individuals were enslaved as a form of punishment for certain crimes and for failing to pay back their debts. Prisoners of war who were not sacrificed would become slaves, and impoverished individuals sometimes sold themselves or family members into slavery. Slavery status was not passed on to the children of slaves. However, unwanted orphan children became slaves and were sometimes sacrificed during religious rituals. Slaves were usually sacrificed when their owners died so that they could continue in their service after death. If a man married a slave woman, he became a slave of the woman’s owner. This was also the case for women who married male slaves.

See the words of David Livingston on his seeing slavery in Africa:

“To overdraw its evils is a simple impossibility ... We passed a slave woman shot or stabbed through the body and lying on the path. Onlookers said an Arab who passed early that morning had done it in anger at losing the price he had given for her, because she was unable to walk any longer. We passed a woman tied by the neck to a tree and dead ... We came upon a man dead from starvation ... ‘’ – David Livingstone

However everyone, who makes a living on false information and denigration of quality, strives to cast Britain as the evil nation. Yet, the fact remains that it was only Britain that in the whole history of mankind that made the concept of slavery a crime. See the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. From Wikipedia:

The Slavery Abolition Act 1833 was an 1833 Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom abolishing slavery throughout the British Empire (with the exceptions “of the Territories in the Possession of the East India Company,” the “Island of Ceylon,” and “the Island of Saint Helena”, which exceptions were eliminated in 1843).

MY COMMENT: The passing of this Act could have a weak side, in that the emancipated slaves were not sent back to their native lands. For, it was letting loose people whose innate social and mental dispositions were not fully understood. Or there should have been proper mechanism in place to train them and iron out negative features. England had no slaves and so did not clearly understand the problem of social communication in other systems different from English.