Sajith’s answer to “As an Indian I find this writer's venom against Britain more than a bit embarrassing. Britain left …” > Likes and Comments
1 like · Like
did you read the book? you cant say his arguments are vacuous (kudos for your vocabulary) if you ignore the 300 footnotes and the five page bibliography he uses to demonstrate the research he undertook). feel free to use his research and draw your own conclusions.
You might not agree with his politics. But the books presents strong prose, supported by research. There is a huge difference between an orator and an academician, and this book is an example. And the arguments are well-posed. I seriously doubt you read the book.
Doubt rises when the deepest beliefs we cherish are challenged by another for which we have no credible response other than reaffirming our belief or doubting their locus standi. That's a natural defence-mechanism present in all of us. In this light, let me say that you are entitled to your doubts.
I appreciate the effort. And I don't identify as an extreme nationalist. I approached the book without any bias and read it for the facts it presented. Dr Tharoor might be an opportunist politician, but I didn't feel like he gave a political picture in the book. His arguments about the British rule in india are supported by facts. But the so-called 'facts' in history can be very biased; because most of it is written narratives (which are heavily biased by the writers socio-political and economic bias). And his opted to narrate the sort from the perspective of the subjects and not its elitist readers.
In my opinion, we were subdued by the British for a long time because of the socio-political views of the elitist Indians. British did have the military might, and we had our over-inflated ego. I liked his perspective, probably because it was inclined (ever so slightly to my prejudices)
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Ramesh
(new)
May 23, 2018 07:30AM
did you read the book? you cant say his arguments are vacuous (kudos for your vocabulary) if you ignore the 300 footnotes and the five page bibliography he uses to demonstrate the research he undertook). feel free to use his research and draw your own conclusions.
reply
|
flag
You might not agree with his politics. But the books presents strong prose, supported by research. There is a huge difference between an orator and an academician, and this book is an example. And the arguments are well-posed. I seriously doubt you read the book.
Doubt rises when the deepest beliefs we cherish are challenged by another for which we have no credible response other than reaffirming our belief or doubting their locus standi. That's a natural defence-mechanism present in all of us. In this light, let me say that you are entitled to your doubts.
I appreciate the effort. And I don't identify as an extreme nationalist. I approached the book without any bias and read it for the facts it presented. Dr Tharoor might be an opportunist politician, but I didn't feel like he gave a political picture in the book. His arguments about the British rule in india are supported by facts. But the so-called 'facts' in history can be very biased; because most of it is written narratives (which are heavily biased by the writers socio-political and economic bias). And his opted to narrate the sort from the perspective of the subjects and not its elitist readers.In my opinion, we were subdued by the British for a long time because of the socio-political views of the elitist Indians. British did have the military might, and we had our over-inflated ego. I liked his perspective, probably because it was inclined (ever so slightly to my prejudices)
