- Oct 9, 2005
- 4,767
- 435
- 126
Clearly history is is supposed to aspire to be an objective recount of what happened in the past and any Indian historically accurate recount of what happened to Muslims at the hands of Hindus in the past would be called Muslim history. That strikes me as such an obvious fact that I can only sadly conclude that your rebuttal of what Perknose quoted appears to me as an outsider to be an obviously shallow rationalization. If a government produces new text books that deny actual past negatives and promote fictitious alternatives it is obvious to any outside observer as to why.
The rationalization of textbooks also removed the Chapters on the Indian Emergency imposed by the Congress party over the country in the 1970s. If the people claim it has been politicized by the government, then the removal of emergency won't make sense as the BJP loses an issue thats a vital poll plank to beat the Congress with.
And you can google the actual state relations between Hindus and Muslims in India in the context of Historical references. So please go ahead and google for what happened to Muslims at the hands of the Hindus and vice versa in the context of Indian history, both modern and ancient.
Last edited:
