---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Eugene Culas <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:10 AM
Subject: Fw: [????-?????:11908] NOTHING BUT ACADEMIC IMMORALITY
To: [email protected]


**
Dear Karthik

As I was afraid, my below given response to those whom you have copied the
article of Prof. Kancha have bounced. So please forward my response to all
email IDs.

Thanks,

Eugene Culas
Voice of Dalit International (VODI)
ICG House
Station Approach
Greenford, London UB6 0AL
Tel/ Fx: 00 44 20 8813 2380 /(M) 7919247332
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.vodintl.org.uk

 *From:* Eugene Culas <[email protected]>
*Sent:* Saturday, July 14, 2012 10:37 PM
*To:* YAM 2006 <[email protected]> ;
[email protected] ;
Greenyouth<[email protected]>;
issuesonline_worldwide <[email protected]> ;
[email protected] ; India
Democrasy<[email protected]>;
[email protected] ; [email protected] ; ark
tindia <[email protected]> ; [email protected] ;
[email protected] ; Zest Group <[email protected]> ;
[email protected] ; Inter IIT Group <[email protected]>;
[email protected] ; [email protected] ; Dalits Media
Watch<[email protected]>; mumbai
friends circle <[email protected]> ; Mulniwasi
Group<[email protected]>;
MulnivasiBahujans <[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [????-?????:11908] NOTHING BUT ACADEMIC IMMORALITY

Dear Karthik

It is a good article. There should be more of this kind to expose the
immorality and intellectual dishonesty of the academic world. Our Indian
academia in general is a disgrace to humanity.

Although I am with Prof. Kanch Ilaiah in his thought process, I am against
the usage of 'upper caste' in stead of  'caste criminals', 'caste
perpetrators', 'caste beneficiaries' and 'casteists'. I feel omitting when
I see this word, which is deliberately coined by the exploitative castes to
score a victory over the caste victims. However I am happy that Kancha did
not use the term 'lower caste' for Dalits/ SCs/STs/ OBCs as many others
still use.

I feel that it is high time that our intellectuals and activists give up
using the terminologies which are caste based and are meant to re-instate
caste values, and start using liberative and international terminologies to
expose the caste realities and name and shame these academicians/
intellectuals from the caste criminal communities for their academic
immorality and intellectual dishonesty. Prf. Kancha talks about English
language in his article. English is full of good terminologies to expose
the real colour of caste. Why can't he and others use liberative
terminologies from English to explain to the ordinary masses of India and
the international community about the devilishness of caste and its
historical beneficiaries, who claim to be intellectuals, experts,
scientists, bureaucrats, academics etc?

Kindly circulate this response in other email groups as I am not a member
of many of the email groups to which you have send the article.

Eugene Culas
Voice of Dalit International (VODI)
ICG House
Station Approach
Greenford, London UB6 0AL
Tel/ Fx: 00 44 20 8813 2380 /
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.vodintl.org.uk


 *From:* Karthik Navayan <[email protected]>
*Sent:* Saturday, July 14, 2012 12:57 PM
*To:* YAM 2006 <[email protected]> ;
[email protected] ;
Greenyouth<[email protected]>;
issuesonline_worldwide <[email protected]> ;
[email protected] ; India
Democrasy<[email protected]>;
[email protected] ; [email protected] ; ark
tindia <[email protected]> ; [email protected] ;
[email protected] ; Zest Group <[email protected]> ;
[email protected] ; Inter IIT Group <[email protected]>;
[email protected] ; [email protected] ; Dalits Media
Watch<[email protected]>; mumbai
friends circle <[email protected]> ; Mulniwasi
Group<[email protected]>;
MulnivasiBahujans <[email protected]>
*Subject:* [भारत-चिँतन:11908] Nothing but academic immorality

Nothing but academic immorality

*13 July 2012, New Delhi, Kancha Ilaiah*

*Educational issues are best left with Parliament and not with
‘intellectual’ experts.*





 [image: Favourite]   FAVOURITE [image: Email]
EMAIL<http://millenniumpost.in/Emailing.aspx?NID=5364> [image:
Print]   PRINT <http://millenniumpost.in/NewsContent.aspx?NID=5364#>Ever
since the Thorat committee submitted its report on the political science
text books of the NCERT of class IX to XII recommending deletion of some
cartoons, changing of some words a gnat war has started against Thorat
personally. M S S Pandian, who agreed to be a member of the committee never
attends the meetings of the committee but writes a dissent note straight
away sitting at home. If ethics are left to winds anybody can attack
anybody. Pandian is a good historian no doubt. But that does not give the
authority to indulge in unethical claims. If academics attack politicians
for not doing their duty but ruling the roost over the nation should not
academicians follow some public morals and ethics of academics? This is a
serious committee constituted by a central government agency to examine the
contents of the school text books that shape millions of lives in this
country. A member’s primary duty is participate in the meetings and
deliberations of the committee and influence its report’s content from
within.

Even though he did that throughout its deliberations even then if the
majority members take a position that is not agreeable to a member he
should write a dissent note, which should also go as part of that report.
If for whatever reasons he cannot attend the deliberations he should simply
resign. But he cannot write a dissent note. If any one does that it is
nothing but academic immorality. Why is a section of media giving more
publicity to this kind of misdeed than the report itself? Are there no
media ethics?

One cartoonist, whose cartoons were present in the NCERT text books,
publishes a cartoon in a paper depicting professor Thorat as loyal dog
working for the government. If this is the level to which the team that put
its written material or cartoons for a price in those text books stoops
down, it could be derived public good in not their motto. If this kind of
people want freedom from parliamentary scrutiny, the scrutiny of
independent committees and think that what they teach to children across
the country has to be allowed, through the means of medium of the state
itself is dangerous. They will emerge as fascists. Nobody is asking them to
not to draw what they want to draw or write what they want to write and
sell in the open market. But they cannot sell through state means at will,
that too to young students all of castes, communities and sexes.

A section of the very same team deployed a discourse that India needs a
critical pedagogy based on the National Curriculum Framework (NCF) 2005 of
the NCERT. They believe that the NCF has evolved the necessary tools to
evolve a curriculum that creates student mass of critical consciousness.
The NCF has been prepared by academicians, who have their own ideological
stands on issues like abolishing caste and untouchbility from this land.
That is understandable. But their claim that the NCF-2005 is the ultimate
document of education is untenable. For example the most prominent members
of the committee including its chairman professor Yash Pal have no track
record of being sympathetic to the most oppressed sections of the society.
When he held the key academic positions including the chairmanship of the
UGC he has not initiated a single programme that advanced the educational
cause of SC/ST/OBCs.

Though they are the most visibly powerful people in the higher education
sector they never held the central universities, IITs, IIMS guilty for not
implementing the basic constitutional dictum of reservations in the
teaching posts, non-teaching posts and even in the student admission
procedures and so on. The parliament and the ministries took more
progressive steps than these so called progressive academicians, when it
came to establishment of inclusive and positively advancing higher
education. This historical experience of SC/ST/OBCs and minorities shows
that the so called progressive upper caste intellectuals are more
systematically negative than the parliament and ministries. The political
intellectuals [party leaders and activists] respond to the demands of the
oppressed masses because they need to go back to them for votes. But the
upper caste academic intellectuals, once got those positions, are
accountable to none and much less afraid of anybody.

In fact, many of these intellectuals were executing the agenda of their
political comrades, who take pro-people decisions in the parliament, but do
not want them to be implemented in the field. Parliament passes laws to
implement reservations, but vice-chancellors do not implement them. Why
were academic experts of high caliber, who have been teaching about values
to the whole world, are silent on such critical issues? Why do not they
write articles and issue statements to build a public opinion that merit is
a social construct? In the whole Ambedkar cartoon, curriculum and the
critical pedagogy debate, some intellectuals were dismissing politicians as
non-experts. How many of these so called experts, say of social sciences,
produced original books that advocated the liberation of the oppressed
masses, at least as much as upper caste politicians like Gandhi, Rammonohar
Lohia, leave alone Ambedkar did. Where is a John Rawls among upper caste
academics of India?

The NCF, which they are claiming as the ultimate document of critical
pedagogy, in the very foreword of the chairman talks about the best medium
of pedagogy is ‘mother tongue’ to undercut the demand of SC/ST/OBCs for
common English medium education at all levels. Pal says '…That
specificities matter, that the mother tongue is critical conduit, that
social, economic and ethnic backgrounds are important for enabling children
to construct their own knowledge'. In which Tongue they wrote the original
NCERT books? In English. Which section’s mother tongue is it in India now?
If mother tongue is the only source of creative writing why did these
writers write these books in a foreign language, which is no body’s mother
tongue in India? This is a deceptive ideological framework to hoodwink the
rural and SC/ST/OBC masses not to demand for English medium schools in the
government sector.

Do the cartoons put in the text books emerge out of the social, economic
and ethnic background of majority of the productive and oppressed masses?
Is there a single cartoon that lampoons a traditional priestly Brahmin, who
attacks a Dalit at the temple, in any text? Is there is a single lesson on
tanning economy, pot making technology or tilling of the land? In the
entire NCF there is no stress on dignity of labour at all. On the contrary,
they repeatedly stressed about peace education. NCF document says, 'Peace
education as an area of study is recommended for inclusion in the
curriculum for teacher education.' In a society of massive oppression and
exploitation what does this peace education mean? Whose peace does it
safeguard?

So far as educational issues are concerned the oppressed masses of the
country would never trust the so called intellectual experts. Let
parliament’s opinion prevail for some more time.

*Kancha Ilaiah is an activist and writer.*

-- 
B.Karthik Navayan,
http://karthiknavayan.wordpress.com/





-- 
B.Karthik Navayan,
http://karthiknavayan.wordpress.com/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.

Reply via email to