Content area
Full Text
DAD!
Yes, beta?
They say that we're being taught false history at school.
Says who?
Scholars.
Go on, beta.
They say that the British fashioned Indians who were white in thoughts; that the Indian mind had become subservient to the West; and that we allow Westerners to interpret our history.
Who are these scholars, beta?
Gautier, Danino, Frawley, Elst...
But, beta!
Yes, dad?
Aren't they all Western ...and white?
Hmm...
Though beta, they must be right!
THE protracted battle over the portrayal of Ancient India and Hinduism in California's sixth-grade History-Social Science textbooks came to a head in late April when a superior court in Sacramento rejected a request by the Hindu American Foundation for a preliminary injunction against the publication of the books.
"I am not convinced that petitioner has carried their burden to show the likelihood that they would succeed on the merits..." declared the judge.
An RSS-inspired organization calling itself a human rights group, the HAF had mounted a last-ditch legal maneuver to compel the State Board of Education to accept the edits proposed by its Hindutva allies-the Hindu Education Foundation and the Vedic Foundation-which the board had rejected in early March. The HAF alleged that the board had failed to perform its duties by approving textbooks "that include descriptions...of Hindus and Hinduism that tend to demean, stereotype and reflect adversely upon them...that inaccurately describe...Hinduism and discourage belief in that religious tradition."
In a state that goes to enormous lengths to reflect a multicultural society in its school curriculum, to "help end stereotyping," these were very serious charges. But the board kept its counsel, only to respond that many of the proposed edits would violate its mandate to provide factually accurate material "reflective of current and confirmed research." The case goes to trial in August, but it is highly unlikely that Hindutva groups will succeed in stopping the books from reaching the students this fall.
As the judge noted, HAF's broadside against the board carries a heavy burden of proof. So, what evidence did it actually offer in support? Whose interests does the HAF really serve, and what are its bona fides to take on alleged stereotyping of religious minorities in California? Is it, in any case, the purpose of history...