Reform in education is dubbed as Saffronisation

   By Vivek Bansal ,  17-Oct-2018
Reform in education is dubbed as Saffronisation

Marxists have spoilt our education system over the last seven decades. They shout saffronisation whenever an educationist attempts to correct the education system of our country. They do this to hide their own misdoings and devious agenda.

There is a hue and cry relating to the saffronisation of education these days. But what exactly is this ‘saffronisation’? No one explains its content and intent. We know that Communalism doesn’t have a definition, and similarly, saffronisation has none. How can you identify the issue without defining it in the first place? Those who are most vocal on the alleged saffronisation is the ‘Red lobby’ who have painted the history of India in the sole colour of their ideology. They have been conspiring to disfigure the presentation and characterisation of our country since the last six decades.

In the independent India, Congress party outsourced the writing of history to the Communists. The latter were only interested in fragmenting this nation since they were accustomed to see sixteen different nationalities in this one unified nation. This group was also the one which first nurtured the idea of two-nation theory based on a communal division. How can such people write a comprehensive history of India? Those who are raising hell over alleged saffronisation today comfortably tend to forget the fact that under the Indira Gandhi Government, Nurul Hasan in his capacity as the Education Minister oversaw the imposition of Marxist ideas without any dialogue and widespread consultation. While Indian Council for Historical Research (ICHR) published the books of Communist leaders like EMS Namboodiripad, nationalist historians like RC Majumdar and Jadunath Sarkar were dumped in garbage.

The countrymen cannot expect a clear picture regarding the history, national character and duties till a distorted scholarship is leading them. Whatever social and political crisis is growing today, that relates to a distorted history writing, crippled education system and dysfunctional development policies which were framed and worked out by the Marxist lobby. However, much to our delight, people are now getting to know about these misdoings of Congress-led Marxists. Now is the time when the countrymen must be told that what exactly this saffronisation of education and history is.

Shouldn’t we rectify the flaws in our History? Is it justified that Marxist history writing where ‘Aryans are Invaders, and Mughals are Indigenous’ must continue to be taught in our classrooms? Why an aggressive invader like Akbar must be called ‘Great’ and the valiant patriot like Maharana Pratap should be abandoned?

Why should the Indian knowledge tradition be hidden from the students? Does going ahead for the communal harmony and unification at the level of the Government and society is sectarianism? Is it not a fact that right from the Radhakrishnana Commission (1948-49), Kothari Commission (1964-66), National Education Policy (1989), Rammurti Committee (1992) and many others emphasised on the value-based education and learning?  Those people who are opposed to the indigenisation of education, which category they must be placed in- Invaders, Anti-National or Foreign Agents?

The groups which are vocally opposed to the nationalist education are seldom seen talking about the communalised education under the Madarasas. Those who completely transformed the education system as Marxist in West Bengal are the same people who are protesting against the move to indigenise it. Why the mother of all Indian languages and the manifestation of Indian culture and soul, Sanskrit, was not allowed to be compulsorily opted into the curriculum? And now when there are attempts to incorporate Sanskrit in the curriculum as an elective subject, what explains the anger and dissatisfaction against it? Didn’t a materialist like Jawaharlal Nehru also admitted the significance of spiritualisation of education? The issues and practises of spirituality is only opposed by a few in our country, while the whole West is looking towards us regarding the same. There has been a gradual increase in the number of universities offering Sanskrit as a subject in the West. Therefore, until we go on neglecting Chanakya’s Arthshastra, Niti of Shukracharya, Ramayana composed by Valmiki, Mahabharat by Vyas, and Rajashastra, there cannot be a fulfilment of the sense of pride for us, Indians.

While there are multiple universities basing themselves on just one Bible and Koran, here in India, despite having a great corpus of textual knowledge in the form of Veda, Upnishada, Purana, etc. forget a university, we don’t even have a specialised department which celebrates them. If an educationist points this inefficiency and suggests a course-correction, (s)he is dubbed as a communalist. If this is not being anti-Hindu, then what is?

Is not true that our education system miserably fails in safeguarding the interests of those students who are failing their exams commit suicide? If strengthening the wisdom, scientific values, emotional, spiritual and factual learning has been dubbed as ‘saffronisation’, why this ‘saffronisation’ must not be revered and welcomed whole-heartedly?

The education which has been imparted since the last six decades by the likes of Romila Thapar and her group is seriously flawed! Marxists seems to be most vocal about the secular-based politics, but in 1941, they extended their support to the two-nation theory by passing a resolution. If they really care about the secular content of education, why they fail to extend the same to the country-wide growing Madarsas? What is taught in these Madarasas and how it affects the adolescent and young minds of Muslim kids has never occurred to these Marxists. It is because to them, the only colour of communalism is Saffron.

The truth is that failing to match BJP in the democratic arena of polity; the Marxists have become the enemies of Indian culture, values and wisdom. Till the time, when all the educational and institutional affairs in this country was favouring Marxists llike Romila Thapar, Satish Chandra, Arjun Dev, etc. they were thriving with celebration, however, when it ceased to exist they are unhappy now. Interestingly the same abuses which Marxists and their acolytes coined for the Indic scholars have backfired on them, and they are gradually getting marginalised. The clarion call of the saffron soul of India is thriving again! The ‘Renaissance of India’ which Sri Aurobindo envisaged cannot be far away, and now, it is cementing itself