Indian History AMA w. Ramachandra Guha | Kumar Varun, Biswa, Neville Shah, Sorabh Pant 

Ohhhhh ok 😂

why did you deleted the original video then?

can we please have the full version? Pretty Please!!!

Full version bhi daal dijiye taklyaji, boht interesting tha ye session.

Reason isn't convincing just saying You have podcast 2 hours long and you trimmed this one only to only 1 hour...dude tell us the real reason

I'm as surprised as you are but honestly he was very accommodating

@@pantonfire Absolutely he is super chill not like that Boomer Uncle😂😂

Can you tell me the blog's name?

thanks

who is the auther at 44:30 ?

Thank you :)

@Sorabh Pant plz pin this comment

DD Kosambi

I forgot what his thoughs were about Makarand Paranjape as a "right-wing" intellectual, if you remmeber lemme know

pant is STUPID

Rahul Dua or Subramanian?

@@PetrolSniffingDoofus Rahul Dua.

Not a debate

Hahaha true. The only other person I can think of is Arvind Subramaniam (Former Economic Advisor)

Sai Deepak and Rajiv Malhotra are also who come to my thought.

I forgot what his thoughs were about Makarand Paranjape as a "right-wing" intellectual, if you remmeber lemme know .

Search about Bhardwaj Speaks on Twitter and then see his work on Authentic Indology /Indian History.

Can I find the longer version????

is he? i dont think he was.....maybe

btw neville looks equally stoned tbh xD

Biswa was not himself... I agree he was stoned!

I have noticed Biswa never discusses politics in any of his videos.

I think he was sleepy afterall he is a part of the comedians cult who have a habit of sleeping very late and then waking up extremely late

P B around 2 hrs

I forgot what his thoughs were about Makarand Paranjape as a "right-wing" intellectual, if you remmeber lemme know

Future Boi He was highly appreciative of Mr Paranjape but was not sure if Mr Paranjape would call himself a “right wing intellectual”. He also said that it would be better if there are well researched papers and books from a right wing perspective so that there could be a healthy debate.

Future Boi Just to clarify, I am paraphrasing here. Those are not his exact words.

@@debashishkaushik yeah I know. Okay then I must have confused him for someone else, who was the one "right-wing" intellectual mr guha showed dissent for ?

Not anymore though.. Welcome to Gairsain😂

@@himanshubisht3581 yeah that's a relief but still mantri log will work from Dehradun (if there is a slight possibility, though I am not sure) and will go to Gairsain for just photoshoot.

@@priyanshujakhmola5886 yupp that's d harsh reality

What do you guys think about Shimla? Don't you think that capital in the hills is a difficult proposition.

Guha is so stupid. He says "I think ambedkar GANDHI recognised this". If you read only basics about Gandhi you realise how he supported caste system, how he was for increasing people in agricultural sector, how he was against Industrialization. Stupidity at its best is synonymous to Guha without the Ram cause he doesn't deserve having the name of the Lord next to him

That is so not true. What does he even mean by "excessive" nostalgia. We are barely taught about our cultural history and heritage. And now when people are trying to connect with their past, these gandhi fanboys are coming out of their holes and lecturing about industrialisation, justice and prosperity. Lovely. Indians are really a rare species who try to suppress and twist their glorious past.

@@Plumeria-tq7et A few pointers: 1) Gandhi ji favoured "Varnashrama dharma" ; but the caste system. For him, varna system was essentially, a system of labour division. Its degeneration resulted in division of society into high and low ranks, which is commonly referred to as caste. He believed that class division was the product of of a condition in which one type of labour i.e. physical labour (provided by the Shudras) was regarded as inferior to another type of labour i.e. mental labour (provided by the Brahmins). Thus, Gandhi ji exhorted people to provide "bread labour". In "Harijan" (1935), Gandhi ji explains that the gospel of bread labour will create a sense of 'dignity of labour' throughout the society. It will also promote equality between the rich and the poor; between the sarvarna and depressed; and between man and woman. Thus, he envisaged a classless society devoid of discrimination on the grounds of gender, faith and labour. In other words, Gandhi ji realised that the division of labour was inevitable for economic progress. However, such division must not result in social division (caste) or economic division (class). 2) Gandhi ji worked towards annihilation of caste system. (Ironically, Dr. Ambedkar wrote an essay in 1906 by the title "annihilation of caste"). In 1933, while in jail for commissioning Civil Disobedience Movement (1930), Gandhi ji started 'All India anti-untouchability league' to address the menace of untouchability. To educate masses, he also launched a weekly magazine titled 'Harijan' which featured his views on caste system. After completing his jail sentence, he started his long march from Madras to Delhi (from November 1933 to July 1934) in which he toured towns and villages across India to fight the evil of untouchability. This was his second long march. (After returning from South Africa in 1915, Gandhi ji toured India till 1917 for the first time). To serve untouchables (and the outcastes) Gandhi ji started several ashrams for their service which were popularly known as 'Harijan Sevak Sangh'. He even undertook fasts to bring out seriousness of the matter (first in May 1934 and then again in August 1934). 3) Gandhi ji was not opposed to industrialisation. He gave primacy to simple technology over advanced technology. His reasons for promoting simple technology were twofold: a) simple technology had the potential to provide vast employment in a populous country like India. Heavy industrialisation would result in vast unemployment as machines will replace human labour. b) heavy industrialisation will usher consumerism (material progress) and deprive people from the path of rectitude (moral progress). The problem of unemployment and associated poverty will result in violence and crime. It would compromise the principle of Ahimsa (non-violence). Thus, he addressed the conscience of the capitalist class with his doctrine of "trusteeship". He argued that the capitalist class should act as trustees rather than owners. They should contribute "voluntarily" to the cause of the poor. This, he said, was consistent with the Jaina philosophy of aparigraha (non-possession) and asteya (non-stealing). Aparigraha implied that one should not possess (material matter) beyond one's immediate needs that too with a spirit of renunciation. If we amass more than our needs, we deprive others of their legitimate share. Thus, it results in stealing and theft thereby, compromising asteya.

@@vaibhavyadav9912 You have rightly pointed out that students and academics do not have enough exposure to "cultural history". Nevertheless, I find your opinion disturbing primarily for the reasons that I am about to mention: 1) History is not about culture. It is merely, as the definition goes, "systematic account of the past events." To associate history with culture is a folly. Frankly, our academic discourse is wrongly accused by motivated individuals for not teaching ancient past. Their objective is to exclude medieval history. James Mill (Scottish historian, Economist and Philosopher) had written a book "the History of British India" in which he attempts to divide Indian history as - Hindu, Muslim and European. Unfortunately, the hardliners today, seem to have adopted this view (which was rightly rejected by our freedom fighters as they argued that such view corresponds to British policy of 'divide and rule'). 2) Culture is also a part of our academic discipline right from school education. Our higher secondary level books, and class 11 NCERT to be precise, educate us on art, architecture, music, theatre, dance forms, paintings and sculptures. Thus, culture is treated as a separate entity fundamentally different from history. 3) As for academics, one must recognise the limitation of our education system: a) In the constitution, education is enumerated under list 3 (concurrent subject) which means, education is to be provided for by the State as well as Union Government. States have their respective regional boards and the Union has its own board (CBSE). So, the history that is taught and learnt will differ from region to region. While, all of us will have to read about similar themes of history (ancient, medieval and modern), the actual substance might change. For instance: Maharashtra board will be inclined to teach Mughal rule vis-a-vis Maratha Empire; Rajasthan board, on the hand will be inclined to teach Mughal rule vis-a-vis Rajputana rule. In other words, a student in Maharashtra will not be that acquainted in Rajputana in the same way as a student from Rajasthan with regard to the history of Maratha. The same argument applies for other State boards as well. b) age is a severe restriction. It is unreasonable to expect a 10 year old to learn about regional kingdom's as well as the history of India as a nation. The fundamental problem that we encounter here is: a) "India" is not a geographic entity. b) India was not governed by a single political regime. Now, here comes the problem. Let me explain the above issues with an example: One reads about the history of Mughals whose empire spanned from Bangladesh (Dhaka) to Afghanistan (Kandahar) and from Jinji (Karnataka) to Suleiman hills (Kashmir). Here, we are missing education on history of India South of Andhra Pradesh and East of Assam. The reason is "India" was not defined geographically which corresponds to my first point. Similarly, we do not learn about tribal Kingdoms like Ahom in Assam. It spanned across the North East into Myanmar. The question therefore is this: if we can learn about events of Mughal empire which includes parts of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, then, why not learn about Ahom Kingdom which includes the entire North East and Myanmar? This corresponds to my second point. Hence, a fine balance is achieved to ensure that "much" of our geographical territory is covered with as many diverse kingdoms and political entities as possible. The term used for academic purposes in our school education is "themes in Indian history" and not "Indian history". I believe that the school education, has done enough justice to inspire curiosity about our past. If one ought to continue on the path of history, our academic disciplines offer specialisation right up to M.Phil and PHD. The larger point is we should not confuse school education for professional education (graduation). Some limitations must be respected. Nevertheless, there is enough space to discover our past (which is not mainstream history like that of Ahom Kingdom). Also, the system is created in such a way as to 'inspire' curiosity than to 'force' information. 4) Finally, I partly disapprove of your splendid belief that Indians are trying to connect with their past. a) To believe that our past was glorious is one thing, but to believe that it was 'perfect' is madness. b) A civilization is premised on certain values. The greatest value in my personal opinion (to which you may disagree) is about acknowledging past mistakes. We should not discredit criticisms when being unfurled against us. Rather, we should make concerted effort to rectify them. Unfortunately, the hardliners have all but lost the ability to take criticisms rightly. Blind acceptance of the past as 'glorious' cannot be deemed as a 'connect' if the values of tolerance, assimilation, diversity and harmony are discouraged and even greatly despised. PS: I am confident that Mr. Guha is many times more accomplished than you and me. With all due respect, I disagree with your name shaming of him and branding him as a 'fanboy'. It is this value that is lost of us & needs urgent reconnect. One may disagree objectively; differ ideologically. Good! Nevertheless, no matter how glorious your past is; It remains history if you are not polite enough to learn from it to design a desirable future.

@@chinmaybendreCSB aa gaya mentally colonised who thinks mr mk gandhi gave us freedom from the British. Ahimsa is best🤤🤤