They don't speak Urdu totally either,it's a colloquial mixture of English,urdu, regional language and hindi. Like 'yaar tune mera pen kaise *use* kar liya' , 'tumne meri ijazat li thi'. And in delhi and it's outskirts it's even bad, the language is so bad you will feel your ears bleeding. I have a friend who's so bad at english pronunciations although she feels so proud and wannabe of her having lived in Delhi and looking forward to shift. I have lived in this region for more than 10 years. The real pure hindi can be seen spoken in eastern UP and a part of bihar and in madhya pradesh as well if i am not wrong
True, I'm south indian but grew up in Delhi and Bangalore and learnt Hindi through out my life. I would say I'm fluent in Hindi but I don't sound like a native and it always bothered me until I realised most Hindi speakers actually speak Urdu. Thats very sad because I like Hindi and try to stick to it's originality and make sure it's correct but I see most natives taunting it with Urdu.
There were many autonomous tribes who were not under his rule, imagine an India where certain random states were different disintegrated countries. (except in vhandragupta's case they were not countries but merely disintegrated land)
Thanks - do you have a source for this please? Re Tribes I’d believe this was the case all around the world during medieval times including Greeks, Saxons, Dane’s and Romans etc.
Modern day Shri Lanka is not ravna's Lanka mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana.
Present day Lanks known by that name only after 1972 before that it was called Ceylon.
https://preview.redd.it/5y6y4uv8hksc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=efc06334cea9addda2e9b0902fa7f7427a89584b
Source: global footprints of Ramayana by Aditya Satsangi (PS. I am not sure about the credibility of the source)
So the Ram Setu is true, we had technology to build that long sea bridges during that time.
It looks like longer than Sri Lanka, so would’ve been more challenging task.
Yeah, but the supposed kingdom was able to build something like that thousands of years ago that's still standing. There has to be more signs of his kingdom, culture and history right?
Okay I think we are debating in a circular manner here and I can see that I might be come off differently than I wanted to.
Just to clarify:
- I don’t think anyone built a bridge, let alone a magic floating bridge
- There’s a high possibility that there was a land bridge there in the the past
- I think it’s possible for a legend where some crossed a land bridge or floated a warrior party across the channel
- Potentially could have dropped a bunch of stones along the way / carved stuff out on the stones that were naturally occurring
- I think this is more probable that we lost documentation of the tribute work than a floating magic bridge
Lol that’s how every make in x operates. At some tier it’s going to be global. These are pretty basic stuff in supply chain.
Do a make vs buy analysis and justify your decision by looking into a mirror lol
Do you realise how much percentage of world's natural resources china has? Its no wonder they produce so much of it. IIRC, China has more than 95% of rare earth metals.
Since it is more profitable for China to sell produced goods than the raw materials, then of course make in india (infact other developed nations as well) will have not much of a choice than what you mentioned in your comment.
While China may have raw materials, that's not why they are the manufacturing hub. They have great factory ecosystems. Just like silicon valley has great development ecosystems
They also manufacture a lot of chips with sand or passive with oil. They definitely import a lot of raw materials too.
Most countries rich in resources just sell the resources.
I never mentioned in my comment that having raw materials was the sole reason they manufacture so much. I am already aware of other reasons (maybe not all, but still).
Dude, 2 companies in the whole world make LEDs, its an extremely complicated process. Every tom dick and harry (including philips) just buys them and makes the bulbs that you buy. It doesn't mean it is "assembly".
There is always certain level of local value addition happening. This kind of comment comes because people see mobile phones and decide it is all chinese. But even there for e.g. samsung manufactures display, battery, pcbs and camera modules in india.
Yep know that dude, the whole purpose was to increase the manufacturing contribution to the GDP. As long as that’s going in the right direction it’s all good.
Having said that, keeping in the spirit of the question asked, it was marketed as something else which isn’t a reality
>Having said that, keeping in the spirit of the question asked, it was marketed as something else which isn’t a reality
Not sure what you were expecting. Becoming the second largest manufacturer of mobile phones in the world (even if significant amount is assembly), within just 5yrs is over-delivery not over-marketing.
It takes decades for these things to happen.
Ajmer Scandal
Please look it up in Google , Wikipedia etc .
Nityananda got cancelled and his entire ashram etc got raided and audited Bev they found him in a compromising position with an adult actress in a consensual manner.
But ajmer dargah case has been buried by media and poltics and even now people are visiting that dargah where 80% of them are actually Hindus
I think Damascus is almost twice as old as Varanasi.
Amazing and very interesting city though.
Except for those scheming pandits who'd want to grab some money from you. Especially as I was with a friend from the UK. Totally ruined the experience.
But the city is just glorious
I think the claim is that, “while it was distributed pogrom, it wasn’t a genocide. A lot of people died but to the scales as it’s said by the right wing”.
I think the official figures put it at 300 deaths with an about a Lakh displaced.
No, it was a targeted killing of pandits, there are just no two ways about that. However, I have never seen anyone say it didnt happen, and I say that as a very hard core liberal.
I didn’t deny that it was a targeted killing or pandits. Look up the definition of “pogrom”. Genocide is an order of magnitude more than that.
I think that’s where the controversy lies, especially when Kashmir files came out people started conflating the visuals in the movie to reality and the dialogues to be facts.
Looking back at documentaries about it before the right wing wave, there was a more measured narrative that talked from the viewpoints of the folks who fled. I’ve seen the burnt sections of Srinagar where the violence was high, it’s a sad sight.
That movie is a propaganda piece used to rile up religious protectionism. They used gore, cliche screenplay incidents and made it seem like the attitude of the general population was fomenting violence.
My parents asked me to go watch it theatre, considering the fact that they don’t like gore or violence, it was shocking. I tried watching it from a neutral viewpoint but it was horrifying and really obvious propaganda piece. I think I would have walked out of the theater if I didn’t watch it online.
Haha. That is ironical, because muslims in Kashmir have been treated extremely harshly, and have lost a lot of souls to just the army occupation alone.
Doubt they covered that at all in the movie
Porus was defeated and captured wherein the famous verse, when Alexander asked how he wants him to be treated and he said treat me as a king would treat another. Alexander annexed punjab and appointed porus as the governor. Punjab became a part of the Macedonian empire.
It was later when they moved towards the Nanda empire that his unrest in his army grew as thry were getting tired with perpetual conquest, that the greek army retreated.
You can even search for all this yourself. Idk where this claim that porus defeated alexander is coming from?
Historians often argue that Alexander didn't defeat porus. Alexander's conquest extended for such a long region, then why did he suddenly stop at Indus valley region and stop? They argue that unrest of army and appointing of governor was a myth spread to the people back in Macedonia.
Don't attack me lol this is just what I have heard
>Idk where this claim that porus defeated alexander is coming from?
Everybody on his right claims this. The poor guy has a neck problem. Can't look around to know the truth.
There has never been a research in any University that claimed Sanskrit as the most suitable language for Computer software. It is simply a false statement.
Recency matters. The impact of a recent culture is far more because they were more advanced than the previous cultures and hence influential. The elements which escape their influence are the only remains of the previous cultures. How much of such elements remain?
We might as well conclude that English conquest of the land was India’s history then. That’s even more relevant in todays context if that’s the lane you are going to view history with.
Whether you agree or not, the European colonizers did have the most impact and influence. When looking back, they have more to help us understand our country's evolution and why we are where we are. Reason? They have written and documented the happenings of their time as well as the decisions and rationale behind the decisions they took. There can be no doubt that they are the first and most reliable history source our country has.
Now, is this ALL of history India had? Nope. But, do we have enough cultural relevance today and a historical artifact from the past to pinpoint who had what impact? Not always. As we go into the past, things become more and more fuzzy, and thereby it becomes more probabilistic than deterministic. You tend to only speculate and thereby allow all biases to seep in. How objective can you be for the time in history that doesn't have much artifacts and relevance left?
A white mans view . That’s all it is. History is never a static point. Civilizations rise and fall and is always cyclical lol. What next Greek history is what ? European financial crisis? Lol
The civilization is one of the oldest living and it’s a joke to teach only what’s happened in a fraction of its lifespan. Feel free to disagree
🤦🏾♂️
You don't seem to understand the point I'm making. Or you are conveniently avoiding it. Let me try once again.
Differentiate between the following:
- Deterministic vs. Probabilistic
- Facts vs. Opinions
- Objective vs. Subjective
- Unbiased vs. Biased
A source that allows one to ***extract*** information that has the characteristics defined in the left, is reliable.
Those, who captured history by writing the happenings of their time down, help us in extracting ***unbiased*** ***objective*** ***facts*** in a ***deterministic*** manner.
Anything that's recent has the most of this kind of information and keeps decreasing as we go into the past. The Europeans wrote something that can help understand well enough what happened after we remove any biases and opinions they might have had. This becomes difficult as we go back into the past further and further.
>A white mans view . That’s all it is.
That's your narrow understanding. No doubt that they are biased, opinionated and judgemental on other civilizations. But ***they are great observers and record keepers.*** This is all that matters. This does not make them just views, but irrefutable information.
>History is never a static point. Civilizations rise and fall and is always cyclical
Nobody disagrees. But do you have enough information to objectively tell what happened at every point in time of history? When you don't have the objective information, how are you sure of what happened?
>The civilization is one of the oldest living and it’s a joke to teach only what’s happened in a fraction of its lifespan.
Consider the following examples:
- ***1857 Sepoy Mutiny*** - Happened. Documented well enough. We can remove all British induced biases and tell exactly what happened.
- ***Ramayana*** - Did it happen? Ayodhya exists. Flying monkeys? Can this be a reliable source? What objective information can you extract? Can you have an unbiased view of history with this?
When you teach the 1857 Sepoy Mutiny, you can interpret it as the First War of Independence. How can you teach Ramayana as a history topic?
If you still think it is, I can't help you.
Can you please give me the source in which babur is portrayed as a hero, and bhai Maratha has also done various atrocities which are also not given in our books, you have to know that our books are tone down a bit
Mughals and other similiar empires were obsessed with writing things down. Not just the story of kings and such, includes court rulings, recipes, stories and poem
Hence the reason why you see more of Mughal history compared to other kingdoms. Not because of 'leftist perspective'
🤦🏾♂️
So do you agree in either case, that the Mughals are the only reliable source to understand history as they have written things down, and hence they need to be studied? So it is how history needs to be studied. Isn't it?
Nah, I don't... All of this destruction of knowledge shows Mughals are not at all a reliable source to understand History.. they have distorted or destroyed things not in their favour... I would rather trust Britishers than Mughals...
One thing Britishers always did was to record things as is..
What? 🤦🏾♂️
You don't understand what a reliable source is. Anything that has enough information to help us understand what happened is a reliable source.
They can be biased however they want, and that doesn't affect its reliability. If A wrote a history celebrating B's defeat, it can be interpreted in either A's favour or against. But it is still considered reliable because they wrote about the war that happened.
So, Mughals fit this description, and hence are reliable.
Delhi Sultans chapter too might I add
They are not just filled with biased content, they are also extremely boring and tough chapters.
(Luckly it was online for me)
as far as I know aryabhatta didn't invent zero,he laid rules for the zeroes
Brahmagupta did, he also made one of the first forms of the quadratic equation: (-b ± √ b²-4ac)/2a
wasn't that shridharacharya's formula?
Correct! But as I said, brahmagupta worked an earlier version of it. The modern one was developed by shridharacharya
Same as Newton didn’t invent gravity.
It's called as *Discovered
Yes, Aryabhatta discovered Zero
No, maths was invented and gravity was discovered.
Hindi is not a national language of India. It's one of the official languages.
One of the 2 languages of the union government, other one being English
Union language? Yeah kya hota hain?
Languages that the central govt will be using. https://www.meity.gov.in/content/official-language-policy-union
This 👆🏻
Most Hindi-speakers actually speak Urdu more.
You will be downvoted to hell but yes very few realise it
Can't hurt a dead man.
They don't speak Urdu totally either,it's a colloquial mixture of English,urdu, regional language and hindi. Like 'yaar tune mera pen kaise *use* kar liya' , 'tumne meri ijazat li thi'. And in delhi and it's outskirts it's even bad, the language is so bad you will feel your ears bleeding. I have a friend who's so bad at english pronunciations although she feels so proud and wannabe of her having lived in Delhi and looking forward to shift. I have lived in this region for more than 10 years. The real pure hindi can be seen spoken in eastern UP and a part of bihar and in madhya pradesh as well if i am not wrong
True, I'm south indian but grew up in Delhi and Bangalore and learnt Hindi through out my life. I would say I'm fluent in Hindi but I don't sound like a native and it always bothered me until I realised most Hindi speakers actually speak Urdu. Thats very sad because I like Hindi and try to stick to it's originality and make sure it's correct but I see most natives taunting it with Urdu.
Contribution of gambhir in 2011 WC
Lol🤣🤣
The immensity of Chandragupta maurya empire. Jaichand didn't betray prithviraj.
Please explain. Genuinely curious to know more, re Chandragupta.
There were many autonomous tribes who were not under his rule, imagine an India where certain random states were different disintegrated countries. (except in vhandragupta's case they were not countries but merely disintegrated land)
The definition of a state/country itself is different compared to that time. Political boundaries wouldn't be considered like we do today.
Thanks - do you have a source for this please? Re Tribes I’d believe this was the case all around the world during medieval times including Greeks, Saxons, Dane’s and Romans etc.
India doesn't have a national game, a national language or a father of nation
Please tell me tiger is our nation animal
That is real
wait hockey?
Nope. Wrong education.
is this the national game then ?
No its not. We don't have a national game. Our teachers taught us wrong. At least mine did, I vividly remember. Lmao idk why I'm getting downvoted.
I was jokingly refering "wrong education" to be our national game 😁.
Ssshh 🤫 You just can't straight up throw facts like that.
National game is time pass
This true
I remember it was written in class 6 books but its wrong
Modern day Shri Lanka is not ravna's Lanka mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana. Present day Lanks known by that name only after 1972 before that it was called Ceylon.
Interesting take, then where is original lanka?
https://preview.redd.it/5y6y4uv8hksc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=efc06334cea9addda2e9b0902fa7f7427a89584b Source: global footprints of Ramayana by Aditya Satsangi (PS. I am not sure about the credibility of the source)
So the Ram Setu is true, we had technology to build that long sea bridges during that time. It looks like longer than Sri Lanka, so would’ve been more challenging task.
To me the whole Ram Seth thing looks like what a king in the past commissioned as a tribute to the legend rather being an actual bridge.
That would be documented, unless it's more than 4k years old which would make Ramayana even more credible
We keep talking about lost literature from past times.
Yeah, but the supposed kingdom was able to build something like that thousands of years ago that's still standing. There has to be more signs of his kingdom, culture and history right?
Okay I think we are debating in a circular manner here and I can see that I might be come off differently than I wanted to. Just to clarify: - I don’t think anyone built a bridge, let alone a magic floating bridge - There’s a high possibility that there was a land bridge there in the the past - I think it’s possible for a legend where some crossed a land bridge or floated a warrior party across the channel - Potentially could have dropped a bunch of stones along the way / carved stuff out on the stones that were naturally occurring - I think this is more probable that we lost documentation of the tribute work than a floating magic bridge
Make in India = Buy Chinese parts and assemble it in India
This. Many people get disappointed when they find this bit of truth.
Lol that’s how every make in x operates. At some tier it’s going to be global. These are pretty basic stuff in supply chain. Do a make vs buy analysis and justify your decision by looking into a mirror lol
At least assembling is done which creates some jobs, if not many
Can't go from 0 to 100 in a few years. It will take consistent national push over decades.
Do you realise how much percentage of world's natural resources china has? Its no wonder they produce so much of it. IIRC, China has more than 95% of rare earth metals. Since it is more profitable for China to sell produced goods than the raw materials, then of course make in india (infact other developed nations as well) will have not much of a choice than what you mentioned in your comment.
While China may have raw materials, that's not why they are the manufacturing hub. They have great factory ecosystems. Just like silicon valley has great development ecosystems They also manufacture a lot of chips with sand or passive with oil. They definitely import a lot of raw materials too. Most countries rich in resources just sell the resources.
I never mentioned in my comment that having raw materials was the sole reason they manufacture so much. I am already aware of other reasons (maybe not all, but still).
But most of the stuff we get from China is cheap plastic that ends up in our lakes and rivers.
Dude, 2 companies in the whole world make LEDs, its an extremely complicated process. Every tom dick and harry (including philips) just buys them and makes the bulbs that you buy. It doesn't mean it is "assembly". There is always certain level of local value addition happening. This kind of comment comes because people see mobile phones and decide it is all chinese. But even there for e.g. samsung manufactures display, battery, pcbs and camera modules in india.
Yep know that dude, the whole purpose was to increase the manufacturing contribution to the GDP. As long as that’s going in the right direction it’s all good. Having said that, keeping in the spirit of the question asked, it was marketed as something else which isn’t a reality
>Having said that, keeping in the spirit of the question asked, it was marketed as something else which isn’t a reality Not sure what you were expecting. Becoming the second largest manufacturer of mobile phones in the world (even if significant amount is assembly), within just 5yrs is over-delivery not over-marketing. It takes decades for these things to happen.
Abhinav Gupt
Ajmer Scandal Please look it up in Google , Wikipedia etc . Nityananda got cancelled and his entire ashram etc got raided and audited Bev they found him in a compromising position with an adult actress in a consensual manner. But ajmer dargah case has been buried by media and poltics and even now people are visiting that dargah where 80% of them are actually Hindus
Nalanda was built by Kumargupta right?
Varanasi is the oldest city in the world which still exists and inhabited. ( All other older cities have been destroyed by time / changes/ disaster)
Varanasi is ONE of the oldest & continously inhabited cities of the word
That question doesn’t have a clear cut answer. Places ranging from Jericho to Damascus to Athens to Ujjain also claim that title.
Is this true ?
I googled again to verify. Do verify again from your side
I think Damascus is almost twice as old as Varanasi. Amazing and very interesting city though. Except for those scheming pandits who'd want to grab some money from you. Especially as I was with a friend from the UK. Totally ruined the experience. But the city is just glorious
No ,oldest city is Jericho in Israel There are atleast a dozen cities in middle East which is older than Israel
Kashmiri Pandit Genocide.
What exactly is the misinformation there ? Thats something that legit happened.
I know but many Indians still believe that kashmiri pandit Genocide didn't happen.
those who dont think that pandits were killed are living in a fantasy land. It was targeted killing of a group of religious people.
🙌🙌
My friend says it happened but not because of islam 🤦🏻♂️🤡
He's delusional
I think the claim is that, “while it was distributed pogrom, it wasn’t a genocide. A lot of people died but to the scales as it’s said by the right wing”. I think the official figures put it at 300 deaths with an about a Lakh displaced.
No, it was a targeted killing of pandits, there are just no two ways about that. However, I have never seen anyone say it didnt happen, and I say that as a very hard core liberal.
I didn’t deny that it was a targeted killing or pandits. Look up the definition of “pogrom”. Genocide is an order of magnitude more than that. I think that’s where the controversy lies, especially when Kashmir files came out people started conflating the visuals in the movie to reality and the dialogues to be facts. Looking back at documentaries about it before the right wing wave, there was a more measured narrative that talked from the viewpoints of the folks who fled. I’ve seen the burnt sections of Srinagar where the violence was high, it’s a sad sight.
Yeah, that movie isn’t a replacement of facts at all. The last person who should be used as a fact dataset is that Agnihotri dude.
That movie is a propaganda piece used to rile up religious protectionism. They used gore, cliche screenplay incidents and made it seem like the attitude of the general population was fomenting violence. My parents asked me to go watch it theatre, considering the fact that they don’t like gore or violence, it was shocking. I tried watching it from a neutral viewpoint but it was horrifying and really obvious propaganda piece. I think I would have walked out of the theater if I didn’t watch it online.
Totally agree. It is absolutely a propaganda piece. I haven’t watched that trash.
Well it took me 3 days to finish it. I watched it because I kept getting Kashmir files as an example to justify Islamophobia.
Haha. That is ironical, because muslims in Kashmir have been treated extremely harshly, and have lost a lot of souls to just the army occupation alone. Doubt they covered that at all in the movie
Alexander defeating Puru rajkumar(Porus)
Whats the misinformation? Alexander did defeat porus in the battle of hydaspes
Iirc, porus's army retreated but alexanders army gave up after the battle.
Porus was defeated and captured wherein the famous verse, when Alexander asked how he wants him to be treated and he said treat me as a king would treat another. Alexander annexed punjab and appointed porus as the governor. Punjab became a part of the Macedonian empire. It was later when they moved towards the Nanda empire that his unrest in his army grew as thry were getting tired with perpetual conquest, that the greek army retreated. You can even search for all this yourself. Idk where this claim that porus defeated alexander is coming from?
Historians often argue that Alexander didn't defeat porus. Alexander's conquest extended for such a long region, then why did he suddenly stop at Indus valley region and stop? They argue that unrest of army and appointing of governor was a myth spread to the people back in Macedonia. Don't attack me lol this is just what I have heard
>Idk where this claim that porus defeated alexander is coming from? Everybody on his right claims this. The poor guy has a neck problem. Can't look around to know the truth.
Billgates never said the statement, that If he doesn't hire Indians, they will create a new Microsoft in India. It is simply a false claim.
who believed it in first place.
Uncles and Aunties. My school teachers
There has never been a research in any University that claimed Sanskrit as the most suitable language for Computer software. It is simply a false statement.
Whole Mughal chapter of NCERT syllabus seems to be written from a very leftist perspective.
believe it or not mughals left a long lasting impact on our country's diversity,culture and architecture.
Positive impact or negative impact? AFAIK the ncert syllabus never mentioned a single major negative impact.
Just 400 years. We have history that’s much much larger
Recency matters. The impact of a recent culture is far more because they were more advanced than the previous cultures and hence influential. The elements which escape their influence are the only remains of the previous cultures. How much of such elements remain?
We might as well conclude that English conquest of the land was India’s history then. That’s even more relevant in todays context if that’s the lane you are going to view history with.
Whether you agree or not, the European colonizers did have the most impact and influence. When looking back, they have more to help us understand our country's evolution and why we are where we are. Reason? They have written and documented the happenings of their time as well as the decisions and rationale behind the decisions they took. There can be no doubt that they are the first and most reliable history source our country has. Now, is this ALL of history India had? Nope. But, do we have enough cultural relevance today and a historical artifact from the past to pinpoint who had what impact? Not always. As we go into the past, things become more and more fuzzy, and thereby it becomes more probabilistic than deterministic. You tend to only speculate and thereby allow all biases to seep in. How objective can you be for the time in history that doesn't have much artifacts and relevance left?
A white mans view . That’s all it is. History is never a static point. Civilizations rise and fall and is always cyclical lol. What next Greek history is what ? European financial crisis? Lol The civilization is one of the oldest living and it’s a joke to teach only what’s happened in a fraction of its lifespan. Feel free to disagree
🤦🏾♂️ You don't seem to understand the point I'm making. Or you are conveniently avoiding it. Let me try once again. Differentiate between the following: - Deterministic vs. Probabilistic - Facts vs. Opinions - Objective vs. Subjective - Unbiased vs. Biased A source that allows one to ***extract*** information that has the characteristics defined in the left, is reliable. Those, who captured history by writing the happenings of their time down, help us in extracting ***unbiased*** ***objective*** ***facts*** in a ***deterministic*** manner. Anything that's recent has the most of this kind of information and keeps decreasing as we go into the past. The Europeans wrote something that can help understand well enough what happened after we remove any biases and opinions they might have had. This becomes difficult as we go back into the past further and further. >A white mans view . That’s all it is. That's your narrow understanding. No doubt that they are biased, opinionated and judgemental on other civilizations. But ***they are great observers and record keepers.*** This is all that matters. This does not make them just views, but irrefutable information. >History is never a static point. Civilizations rise and fall and is always cyclical Nobody disagrees. But do you have enough information to objectively tell what happened at every point in time of history? When you don't have the objective information, how are you sure of what happened? >The civilization is one of the oldest living and it’s a joke to teach only what’s happened in a fraction of its lifespan. Consider the following examples: - ***1857 Sepoy Mutiny*** - Happened. Documented well enough. We can remove all British induced biases and tell exactly what happened. - ***Ramayana*** - Did it happen? Ayodhya exists. Flying monkeys? Can this be a reliable source? What objective information can you extract? Can you have an unbiased view of history with this? When you teach the 1857 Sepoy Mutiny, you can interpret it as the First War of Independence. How can you teach Ramayana as a history topic? If you still think it is, I can't help you.
~~seems to be written from a very leftist perspective.~~ it doesn't fit my narrative so I will paint it as leftist propaganda.
Its called the "Nehruvian way of writing history", i.e. bhaichara badhane wala pathyakram, chahe baad mein bhale hi log sadko pe utar ayein.
[удалено]
Do you want a 13 year old to be reading about rape and other brutal crimes???
Well there are other ways of teaching about atrocities,also if you can't teach brutality don't potray them as heroes also
Bro please give me the source where they are being portrayed as hero
Yes but dabur is your hero right? If you can't teach 13yos about rape, don't portray rapists as heroes.
Can you please give me the source in which babur is portrayed as a hero, and bhai Maratha has also done various atrocities which are also not given in our books, you have to know that our books are tone down a bit
It doesn't fit any Indian's narrative. Randians not included in "Indian".
Mughals and other similiar empires were obsessed with writing things down. Not just the story of kings and such, includes court rulings, recipes, stories and poem Hence the reason why you see more of Mughal history compared to other kingdoms. Not because of 'leftist perspective'
or they just destroyed everything else.. nalanda and thousands of mandirs being the prime example..
🤦🏾♂️ So do you agree in either case, that the Mughals are the only reliable source to understand history as they have written things down, and hence they need to be studied? So it is how history needs to be studied. Isn't it?
Nah, I don't... All of this destruction of knowledge shows Mughals are not at all a reliable source to understand History.. they have distorted or destroyed things not in their favour... I would rather trust Britishers than Mughals... One thing Britishers always did was to record things as is..
What? 🤦🏾♂️ You don't understand what a reliable source is. Anything that has enough information to help us understand what happened is a reliable source. They can be biased however they want, and that doesn't affect its reliability. If A wrote a history celebrating B's defeat, it can be interpreted in either A's favour or against. But it is still considered reliable because they wrote about the war that happened. So, Mughals fit this description, and hence are reliable.
It’s because they tried to destroy and burn everything else.
Delhi Sultans chapter too might I add They are not just filled with biased content, they are also extremely boring and tough chapters. (Luckly it was online for me)
Aryan invasion theory
There is no such thing as aryans and dravidians. aryan invasion (now cleverly modified to migration) theory is a fiction and has zero real proofs.
What is ASI and ANI then?
Globally, Bengalis = 🇧🇩, not al***so t***his: https://preview.redd.it/re9lhbm21msc1.png?width=1965&format=png&auto=webp&s=0e014e69cbaa3dcd05aa88d500a290774e5ce538
Or nalanda wasn't a university It was a dharmashala type school. Or mathh University must give degrees and have uniform curriculum that's recognised.
Also get recognition from UGC /s