Our prime minister and most citizens love to brag about "ancient culture" and "proud history", but preservation of our own history and public record was and is done much better by the British and Americans. It's truly nauseating.
Peoples who achieved more than their ancestors have less history to be prideful of, since they are proud of their present.
Yes. I think so too.
The bragging is mostly patriotism and it wouldn't be a wonder if the same patriotism made them wish they could erase or forget their own embarrassing past two centuries of history. Most of the historic records before that point were totally destroyed or lost so feeling proud of what's left and moving on is not bad but seriously not prioritizing preservation is really ignorant.
It's actually cultural. Even foreign historians from a thousand years back such as Al Biruni criticized the Indian cultural norms of focusing on oral traditions, instead of written text, and the use of assumptions, story telling and exaggerations instead of facts and accurate retelling, which in turn feeds into a culture that prioritized fantasy over curiosity. It's stunning to say how we can obtain accurate records of the locations of the homes destroyed in the Great Fire of London in the 16th century, but don't have an accurate account of many kings in the Indian subcontinent during the 19th century.
This could have been a direct result of the caste system, wherein the deep study of literature was only allowed for Brahmins - not even the kings and nobility.
Treat a book properly, and thousands of people across future decades will be able to peruse it. Treat it like garbage, and that knowledge won't be available in the future. It's the same with digitization. You need a plan to keep all the books you digitize, or else it's in danger of getting lost if the government/responsible person gets defunded/deprioritized.
All talk about "glorious history of culture and science" is hollow if you cannot store proof of it properly.
I think part of the problem is exactly this. We don't say Spain should be embarrassed at the Muslim conquest, yet we're expected to say India should be 'ashamed' (for what?) for their past two centuries? History just is... We should stop assigning emotional value to it.
The issue here is twofold. Firstly, India is not unique in this pursuit. China also has taken charge of constructing its own history, and sometimes it's at odds with Western thinking. Often time, the oral / traditional accounts are found to be true.
Secondly, the West also falls into magical thinking. For example, right here, you are parroting the idea that Indian heterodoxy over their own history is misguided. However, it has a clear historical basis in the fact that Britain tried to expropriate most of its history. I don't mean taking various artifacts.
I mean that, for many years, Western historians pushed the idea that the Indus Valley Civilization inhabitants were not related to modern Indians. They couldn't deal with the fact that Indians may have had one of the oldest, largest, and richest ancient civilizations. Of course history has proved them wrong.... Harappan genes are well represented in the Indian subcontinent.
So, sure, we can make all kinds of claims about Indian historians inflating their own history (I would agree), but to then say that Western historians don't is just wrong... Remember, Nazi Germany's racial policy is the direct result of a ridiculously flawed and fantastical understanding of Indian history by Western historians. Like it or not, the Nazis were western too (and besides, plenty of non-German historians agreed with them... we just like to forget about that).
Finally, we cannot ignore the impact of Nazism here. Even today, it is difficult to talk about Aryans without conjuring up images of genocidal Germans. Research has to be qualified and disclaimed so that people don't take the objective historical record and try to justify more atrocities.
For example, going back to the IVC. European historians were insistent that the Aryans civilized India, and many insisted that the IVC was Aryan, and not really 'Indian'. Again, the evidence is very clear that the Harappans have no steppe ancestry. But again, we have an example of the very sort of behavior you accuse india of, except by British historians.
I've known Indians to treat books with respect. It's ingrained in the culture. Books can't be on the floor or touched with a foot. Kids spend days learning how to create books sleeves with brown crafts. Texybooks are well treated due to hand-me-down culture. Vidya (books) is specifically worshipped online home idol-houses. Pirated books or fake photo copies get mistreated, but mostly because they're printed on low budget paper backs. The state of libraries is bad, but so is the state of all infrastructure generally.
In the US, I have yet to see individuals take extraordinary care of books. Yes, textbooks worth $100+ are well treated, but anything that expensive is well treated. (I still have an old HC Verma copy). Libraries are exemplary, but the budgets are incomparable.
I will agree on the sorry state of Indian liberal arts including museums and libraries. The education, quality of scholarship and resulting professionals are subpar compared to the western world. India has excellent STEM and Medical education. The rest have a long way to go.
Feet don't have any use for books, so that doesn't matter much. Book sleeves and brown crafts are because of school rules, else those don't happen. Anyway, you should see how the books within those brown sleeves get by end of school year. Books get handed down in good shape only when a parent is unusually strict about those books (mine were, which is why I have a chip on my shoulder regarding this topic) or if the kid is conscientious. Woe betide you if you loan a book to a random friend; there are good chances it won't come back whole because of the "why-should-I-care-I-don't-own-it" mentality.
Part of it, as you imply, is the cheaper price, and thus quality and binding of the books made in India.
It explains in some swirly script language, execpt for "5Rs", that there is a fine for defacing the building (I had it translated).
From another part:
> Mr Michelson-Ambelang told the BBC that the removal of books from South Asia through programmes like PL-480 "creates knowledge gaps", as researchers from there often need to travel to the West to access these resources.
The knowledge gap is that America has the books and India doesn’t. If the books had stayed in India, I think that would have closed the knowledge gap because nobody would have them. They would have been lost just like the other copies of the books.
Hot and humid climates result in (historically)rapid decay of plant and animal based writing surfaces
(I could list many similar paternalistic takes)
Slightly tangential, but does anyone know why India faced such shortages in the 50s and 60s? I found an article on the subject [0] but it seems to come down to little more than mild crop yield variation combined with market speculation.
This is a period of India's history that I find particularly interesting by way of comparison with China's "Great Famine". The latter is often put forward as a strong condemnation of communist economics, for example in the "Black Book of Communism". But in Chomsky's article response "Counting the bodies" (which I cannot seem to find a link for) he points out that India's per capita excess mortality rate over roughly this period is in fact greater than China's.
I'm neither an authoritarian communist or a big fan of Chomsky's, but I would love to find reliable sources on this topic to come to my own conclusions.
[0] https://www.economicsdiscussion.net/india/food-problem/food-...
<quotes> Low productivity: In the context of India's rapidly growing population, the country's traditional agricultural practices yielded insufficient food production. By the 1960s, this low productivity led India to experience food grain shortages that were more severe than those of other developing countries.[1]
The effort was in fact an adoption of America's agriculture land grant system for universities on Indian soil. It helped launch what we now commonly call India's "green revolution." The U.S. Government, through the United States Agency for International Development (AID) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, partnering with the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, helped establish five state agriculture universities in India - including the Punjab Agricultural University - PAU - in Ludhiana. This was a significant joint intellectual and scientific effort: American universities sent educators and agricultural advisors to India to work side-by-side with Indian scientists and students. At the same time, American universities welcomed a corps of Indian agricultural specialists to American university campuses where they could learn first-hand about the technologies we employed in productive farming, ranching and crop science.[2] </quote>
It does seem like outdated agricultural practices and a booming population are critical factors. But that doesn't easily explain why there was an acute food shortage in 1958-59, despite rising yields (as per the article I linked).
People confuse democracy with the free market. It's not. India up until the 90s had a tightly regulated economy that rivaled China's economic control.
and
>Mr Michelson-Ambelang told the BBC that the removal of books from South Asia through programmes like PL-480 "creates knowledge gaps", as researchers from there often need to travel to the West to access these resources.
and
> It is unclear whether all the books acquired by US universities from India at that time are still available there. According to Maya Dodd, of India's FLAME University, many books now unavailable in India can be found in the University of Chicago's library collections, all marked with the stamp saying "PL-480".
Although a charitable reading is they aren't available because of decay.
While India has a moral claim to these artifacts, it will take another decade or two of growth before there is adequate bureaucratic bandwidth to provision the necessary infra needed to maintain them at home. Until then, the status quo works.
Does it really? It sounds like many of these books were purchased while they were still in print.
If anything shouldn't buying books/media this way be good for publishing industry in India at the time? (Arguably, a small impact if any)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_I...