'Nazi' row over Indian textbooks

BBC ^ | 7/23/2005 | BBC

[minus_273]

Human rights campaigners in India's Gujarat state have condemned school textbooks which they say praise Hitler. The books are issued by the Hindu nationalist state government. One includes a chapter on the "internal achievements of Nazism".

A Jesuit priest and social activist, Cedric Prakash, says the books contain more than 300 factual errors and make little mention of the holocaust.

The Gujarat government has dismissed the charges as baseless.

[minus_273]

In the chapter entitled "Internal achievements of Nazism," one textbook quoted by AFP states: "Hitler lent dignity and prestige to the German government within a short time, establishing a strong administrative set-up."

considering this is a Socialist country that fought on the Axis side, i am not surprised. Some indian heroes like Subhas Chandra Bose are actually Nazi war criminals

[strider123]

Your ignorance is mindboggling. India was a slave of the British empire when the WW2 was happening. Hardly in a position to decide which country to ally with. And Subhash Chandra Bose was a freedom fighter with a single point agenda - to free India from British rule. To Indians who were enslaved by the British - the only enemy , the only fascists were the Brits. Any help to fight the Brits - whether it was from Roosevelt's US or Hitler's Germany was welcome. To call a great Indian freedom fighter like Subhash Chandra Bose - who is more loved and admired in India than even Gandhi - a nazi war criminal is absurd. He was just an Indian freedom fighter.

[strider123]

Also...hindu fundamentalists are the biggest fans of Israel and Jews in the world. They admire Israel and Jews for the way they deal with muslims.

Some elements opposed to hindus act as mischief mongers and spread the canard that they idolise Hitler. Nope. Hitler didn't kill any muslims , did he ? Hindu fanatics idolise Israel and the Jews and these days idolise Bush and the US. Not Hitler.

[PAR35]

this is a Socialist country that fought on the Axis side

Willingly or unwillingly, India and Indian troops fought on the allied side. There were over a 100,000 Ghurkas in 40 battalions in World War II. Among other battles, they fought at Monte Cassino in Italy. India also hosted the western end of the supply lines into China, and was the base for operations into Burma. The 14th and 26th Indian Infantry Divisions moved into Burma in October, 1942. Other units fought there later.

It appears that you need to do a whole lot more reading and a whole lot less writing on this subject.

[strider123]

Thanks for that. My knowledge of WW-2 is very limited because at school in India , our history books were more concerned with India's freedom struggle than with WW-2. Also , we Indians are embarassed that so many of our soldiers (50,000+) fought and died fighting for the country that enslaved us. Its hardly a matter of pride for us that we fought for the allies. Because we didn't fight as equal and willing parters...but as slaves of the British empire.

[CarrotAndStick]

I've done this before, I'll do it again. Here goes:

Chindits in Burma, 1944

British and Indian troops in action, 80 miles south of Mandalay, in March 1945

Madras Sappers and Miners work on a 'corduroy' road east of Kohima, on the Jessami track, August 1944. Timber provided a cheap way of producing a reasonably durable road surface for those hard-to-reach areas where mule or air transport was not enough.

Indian Paratroopers during World War II, with a British officer. Source: Parachute Regiment (India).

The first Indians to parachute - Captain Rangaraj (right) and Havildar Major Mathura Singh (left).

British and Indian troops exchange pleasantries as they meet on the road between Imphal and Kohima following the successful relief of the Kohima box. Circa April 1944.

A truly spectacular image. In the heat of the moment - Indian soldiers storm a German trench, after exploding it with hand grenades. Circa 1945.

An Italian soldier surrenders to a Jawan, during Operation Crusader, of an unnamed Division and Regiment, on 08 December 1941. The purpose of Operation Crusader was two-fold; to relieve Tobruk and destroy the Afrika Korp. First part of the conflict was a success, the second a failure. The battle took place between the Egyptian border and El Agheila in Libya.

An Indian soldier holds a captured Nazi flag. Circa 1945.

Medium artillery guns get unusual attention from their detachments.

Indian paratroopers being dropped at Elephant Point, Burma on 1 May 1945.

Flag captured from the 90th Panzer Light Division at Ruweisat Ridge. Circa 1942.

A Lieutenant Colonel from the 20th Indian Division, accepts the formal surrender of a Japanese Commander at Saigon, Vietnam in September 1945.

A group from the 152nd Para Battalion displaying the Japanese flag they captured while operating against the Japanese Army at Tangkhul Hundung. Circa 1945.

The Great War (World War I) A cover from a piece of British sheet music. Circa 1914. Note that the Indian soldiers are pictured as still being armed with the single shot Martini-Henry rifles and muzzle loading artillery!">

[Republicanus_Tyrannus]

Anyone embarassed for fighting against the Nazi horror in WWII is someone without a brain, a heart, AND a sense of right and wrong. To say that you are embarassed for fighting against the Nazis is to brand yourself as a monster who supports genocide - and don't EVEN try to equate British rule with the Nazi genocidal holocaust.

Methinks you won't get anyone on your side with such disgusting talk around here, buddy. We don't like neo-Nazis or their admirers around here.

[dervish]

"2004

• "The Gujarat State Higher Secondary Board, to which nearly 98 percent of schools in Gujarat belong, requires the use of certain textbooks in which Nazism is condoned. In the Standard 10 social studies textbook, the "charismatic personality" of "Hitler the Supremo" and the "achievements of Nazism" are described at length. The textbook does not acknowledge Nazi extermination policies or concentration camps except for a passing reference to "a policy of opposition towards the Jewish people and [advocacy for] the supremacy of the German race."

This was one item in a letter requesting the denial of a US Visa to Narendra Modi, Chief Minister of Gujarat, and signed, among others, by Nina Shea, Director, Center for Religious Freedom, Freedom House a Conservative think tank.

[dervish]

Sorry forgot the link.

http://www.religionandpolicy.org/show.php?p=1.1.1543

[Republicanus_Tyrannus]

India was a slave of the British empire ...

And another thing - The above quote is where you start wrong. It was not a "slave nation" in any sense of the word. It was administered as a client nation, yes - but it was not even close to being a "slave".

Not saying that it was all wine and roses, but India did enjoy massive infrastructure improvements, roads, railways, schools, wells, docks, aquaducts, hospitals, universities - all from being a member/client nation of the British Empire. There was also LIMITED self rule - yes, it was not sovereign. Yes, no American would ever bear anything close to that status for one single second on one single square inch of America. Yes, you were not allowed to be neutral in WWII - but no decent human being WAS neutral.

India suffered less than Belgium, or France, or Holland. Far, far less by several orders of magnitude than Poland. The "suffering" of the Indian people under the administration of the British was a single teardrop compared to the ocean of death, murder, industrialized starvation, and clouds of stinking smoke from the burning of murdered bodies that clouded the skies of Europe for a generation.

Don't ever try to say that India suffered as much under the Brits as ANYONE did under the Nazis or the Stalinists - that comparison is obscene.

[PAR35]

Its hardly a matter of pride for us that we fought for the allies. Because we didn't fight as equal and willing parters...but as slaves of the British empire.

It appears that you have been the victim of propaganda. Do some independent research and reading. Sounds like there is a market for some revisionist history.

[strider123]

Huh ? Indians dont care about Nazis. But are shamed of fighting and dying for the British - who enslaved , humiliated and tortured them for ages. Most Indians of that period (pre-independence) , were illiterate and fighting hunger. Not because of Nazis. But because of the British. Its unlikely any of them even heard of 'nazis' or 'hitler' or whatever. When one is dying of hunger , one doesn't worry about whats happening in the other end of the globe a million miles away.

[strider123]

Thats hardly a proof , is it ? Just a bunch of anti-hindu activists trying to defame hindus in the eyes of the world.

[Republicanus_Tyrannus]

Buddy, you've got blinders on. You obviously have no clue whatsoever what has happened in the world outside of your own family/town/province for the last 100 years, or you would vomit a bit in shame for what you've said. For one thing, sunshine, more British CHILDREN under the age of 12 died from those "nazi people" you know nothing about than died in all of the Indian regiments serving in World War II.

More people died of starvation DELIBERATELY (never done under ANY British administration, buddy) under Stalin in 18 months than died in the whole of India in 3 decades starting in the 20's.

"Freedom fighter"? I won't insult your great-grandfather's memory unless he fought against the British while WWII was ongoing. Then, yes, he would have been a worthless nazi-sympathizing murderer. Before you try to whitewash him, learn yourself some history.

Did he have a uniform? No? That makes him a terrorist. Worthless, violent, and simply evil. Sorry charlie - learn some world history before you spout hosannas to Hitler.

[strider123]

Haha...you do some reading first. India's freedon struggle was non-violent remember ? All because of that idiot Gandhi. Appeal to the conscience of the enemy , Gandhi said. Give up material comforts , said Gandhi. And my stupid ancestor followed blindly. And he wasn't alone. Whole country followed Gandhi. Otherwise , if not for Gandhi's non-violence freedom 'fighting' , Indians would have taken advantage of WW-2 and slit the throat of any British official/soldier left in India. But being the fools that they were , they suffered silently , even died for the Brits.

[strider123]

Just quit it.You hardly know what you are talking about. Ignorance is not even funny.

[strider123]

"before you spout hosannas to Hitler"...........when did I do that genius ?

[dervish]

I don't think Freedom House is anti-Hindu. They are a very respectable fair-minded organization who monitor countries around the world in a realistic manner. They are no Amnesty/Human Rights Watch leftists. They rate India highly on their Freedom Index.

While I personally do not agree with the decision to deny a Visa to Narendra Modi, I don't think problems should be swept under the table either.

Several Indian posters here who are Hindu have also spoken against Modi.

[Republicanus_Tyrannus]

"After returning to India, he joined the Congress party and was particularly active in its youth wing. Bose's ideas did not match with that of Gandhi's belief in non-violence. So he returned to Calcutta to work under Chittaranjan Das, the Bengali freedom fighter and co-founder (with Motilal Nehru) of the Swarajya (Self Rule) Party. In 1921, Bose organised a boycott of the celebrations to mark the Prince of Wales' visit to India. This led to his being imprisoned. In April 1924, Bose was elected the Chief Executive Officer of the newly constituted Calcutta Corporation. Later, in October that year, Bose was arrested as a suspected terrorist.

If they were all carebear, snuggly non-violent people, then Subhas Chandra Bose would never have been arrested. You remember, that guy you called a "freedom fighter"?

If there were no violent incidents, there would have been no indictments (remember- British legal system?) If there was no violence, then there would have been no arrest. Oh BUT WAIT! Look! He didn't agree with Ghandi! So that gives you an F in history, an F in logic, and an A in avoiding entanglement with violence through fast talking - but an F in reading as you didn't understand that I made a proviso if your great grandad DIDN'T fight - and he didn't if he was non-violent. If he did - then he was a terrorist if he didn't have a uniform

You say he gave up a government job - that means he was an educated man. Therefore - he KNEW what was going on in Europe. He wasn't "unknowing" or ignorant of the outside world. Don't spread that self-serving "pity me we were poor" fertilizer here. If he was as you describe, a civil servant who quit - then he KNEW what the Nazis were all about. The fact that you make such idiotic comparisons without understanding the depth of evil the Nazis achieved ("some guy called 'Hitler' and his 'Nazis' for the terrible things they did to some people called 'Jews'") shows that at least one thing is true - he obviously failed to educate you to his level. Or you've been indoctrinated in some sort of nationalist pseudo-fascist doctrine.

It's like you are comparing stubbing your toe with cannibalism. It's sick, absurd, and revolting for you to go on whitewashing Nazi atrocities and comparing them to British misdeeds. That's repulsive and simply stupid.