tracing the roots

8/3/2019 Tracing the Roots

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tracing-the-roots 1/6

Tracing the roots

Before our discussion exclusively enters the Indian domain, let us try to analyze certain general

features which, in my opinion, are ubiquitous in the Asian society at large. It‟s natural that India,being a part of the continent, is subjective to the societal paradigms that characterize it.

Asia, as you are aware, was exposed to modernism much later than Europe. It never had a

coherent social foundation before the coming of the European aggressors. Civilization prospered;

empires emerged and collapsed; boundaries were drawn and redrawn by wars and conflicts. Butthe identity of the people, the glue to hold a social structure together, always remained fluid and

changed with the rapidly altering sociopolitical background of the individual.

This fluidity precluded the genesis of a socioeconomic structure robust enough to cater to the

demands of the masses and move the wheels of the society. Instead, there was a verticalhierarchy, in which the position of an individual was determined by rank, religion and privilege.

Since the society was fluid, the urge to get oneself elevated to the higher echelons of the social

pyramid was the driving force behind the society and determined its behavior. Hence, theanimosity between Brahmins and Kshatriyas; between Kshatriyas and Vaishyas; between

Mohammedan Sultans and Hindu Rajputs. This abstractness discernible in the identity of the

Asian society, and the consequences of the abstractness should be closely noted as they are oneof the keys to interpret the dynamics of the education system.

One of the results of the abstractness was a rapid formation of „inclusion groups‟, which

consisted of a conglomeration of people who shared the same position and sphere of influence

within the framework of the societal fabric, initiated with the aim of curving out an explicitidentity for themselves within the fabric. That swiftly metamorphosed into a caste system, the

privileged wielding the most power and starting to dominate areas like education. Elitism and an

undercurrent of bitterness towards elitism by the „not-so-elite,‟ who missed out on the spoilsenjoyed by the former class, has always been a decisive aspect of India, or, for that matter, any

society. The co-relations, interrelations and interactions between these two groups in the grid of

India‟s social map need thorough studying if we are to theorize a solution for our malaise. The

weight carried by such interactions is the currency of mobilization within the social domain andwill be crucial in understanding the nature of and solutions to our maladies.

Coming back to the Asian domain, partly due to an unorganized society experiencing roiling and

churning every moment due to the clash of different interest groups, and partly due to thepolitical turmoil, the period between the end of the Middle Ages and the start of the Modern Age

was characterized by an intellectual stagnation. The status quo, sunk in anachronisms, plunged

the continent into an acute poverty of thought and innovation. In India, the Mughal Empire

imploded, vomiting out innumerable potentates and princely states. I am not well versed with thehistories of China and Japan, but it seems that they too were going through a period of great

socioeconomic predicament. China was infested with regional warlords engaged in aninternecine conflict, and Japan could never assert itself in global geopolitics before the MeijiRestoration.

What was the system of education which prevailed back then? A system which was patronized

by the ruling class to throw up eulogists, sycophants and menial slaves who, genuflecting beforethe status quo will ensure the sustenance and continuation of a feudalized, hierarchized system.

Intellectual discourse grinded to a halt, and dark clouds of socio-religious orthodoxy blurred the

firmament.



The coming of the British saw some radical transformations in the societal paradigms. The

groundwork of a modern education system was laid by stalwarts like Lord Bentinck and Thomas

Babington Macaulay. However, they never quite aimed at „changing‟ the fundamentals of thesystem. They never aspired to make education accessible to the masses as it was incompatible

with any colonial design. Rather, they sought to form a servile „class of persons Indian in blood

and color and English in taste, opinions in morals and in intellect.‟ The notorious „babu‟ class.Education will percolate in driblets from the „babu‟ to the pauper, as he lucidly states in hisinfamous „Filtration Theory‟.

This brings us to your question. Whether we could have foreseen the disaster coming twohundred years in advance. Whether we could have averted the crisis with requisite foresight and

sagacity.

The answer is, we did. As early as in 1905, the University of Calcutta, the most prestigiousuniversity of the contemporary times, was upbraided as a „slave hatchery‟ by nationalist leaders

who began the national education movement with the aim of unshackling education from British

control and promulgating a new educational policy which will be in consonance with indigenous

wants and desires, while, at the same time, acknowledging the significance of Westernism in

expansion of the moral horizons of the nation.Unfortunately, the counter-culturist current dried up as soon as it started to flow. More than the

colonial administration, it was the indifference of the people which precipitated its failure, inaddition to other factors like lack of funding, inadequate planning, internal dissensions and the

inability to set up any coherent decision making authority. Countless schools and colleges were

opened with Swadeshi zeal and patriotic ardour. Most closed down within a few years. Some,

like the Jadavpur University of today, were turned into the same „slave hatchery‟ which thenationalists were striving against. The status quo was too rigid and inflexible for the iconoclasts

to bring about any „real‟ change.

What lessons can be drawn from the failure of the first ever try at „changing‟ the system?Well, I can point out three.

A> Change has to come from within the society. No attempt at „inducing‟ a change from

outside will yield results in the context of India.

B> A proper understanding of the problem is imperative before theorizing a solution.C> The smokescreen of a moth-eaten education system is vital for elitist exploitation,

perpetuation of social iniquities, and seamless supply of menial manpower to the

administration, and, in recent times, the authoritarian corporate world. Hence, trenchantopposition is very likely from vested interests and ruling quarters on the question of

change. The alternative framework must be so strong as to endure that opposition.

I‟m constrained by the lack of sound historical knowledge while discussing about the other Asiansocieties whose education systems, if I may add, bear striking similarities with that of the Indian

one, which is why I‟m trying to analyze the malaise through a broader perspective.However, the general idea that one gets is that the evolution of socio-educational systems of the

other Asian societies followed a trajectory which was slightly different from that followed theIndian one. But, the two paths did intersect at different point, which accounts for the similarities.

It seems that after the unimaginable devastation inflicted on the Asian nations by conflicts like

the Second World War, the Korean War, the Indo-China War and the Chinese Civil War, theindigenous social foundations of the countries broke down, to be replaced violently and suddenly

by alien systems. In China‟s case, it was Communist dictatorship. For Japan and South Korea, itwas unobstructed ingress of neo-liberalism. This „transition‟, and the ensuing social upheaval it,



spawned an „inclusion group‟, balanced in the sociocultural vacuum created by radical social

transformations and detached from the traditional way of life, which resembled a peculiar fusionof entrenched orthodoxy and an equally ingrained desire of rising up the vertical hierarchy by

expedient means. A system is but a sum total of the social interactions and behavioral patterns

exhibited by the individual. Since expediency became the currency of social exchange, it slowly

came to be reflected in the education system, paving the way for cram schools, rote learners andall the other evils that are so discernible today.

The problems are no less acute in other developing countries than they are in India. In fact, I‟m

willing to argue that South Korean, or Japanese, or Chinese students spend their days undermuch more trauma and stress than their Indian peers. A report even goes on to suggest that the

cost of giving proper education to a child is so immensely high in South Korea that not many are

willing to be parents.Some pertinent questions are likely arise from this discussion.

A> What are the ways in which the Indian education system is different from the generalized

Asian one?

B> How is social fluidity still contributing to the continuance of the iniquitous social system?

C> What are the factors which are precipitating the crisis?D> What solutions can be theorized as ways out of the crisis?

These will form the second segment of our debate, in case you are not bored and exasperated

with my preposterous ramblings. But first, I‟d be waiting for your reply and opinions.

Before I begin to scribble more or less a reply to this, I have to confess that owing to my lack of

sound knowledge of Asian history in comparison to you, I'm inclined to believe all facts you'vestated without any remonstrance, although most of them are indeed in tandem with the

knowledge and idea I already possess of the Indian history.

One of the most important conclusion here arises that our maladies can not in any way beattributed just to the last few decades but have been ingrained into the system much much earlier

than that, only perhaps in latent form, or perhaps ignored, and insidiously, their effects have

become visible only now, and that too to only a handful of people. I will try to build up on yourdescription and provide another floor to the timeline-building, with my attempts to incorporate

the modern era factors (in case of India, the post-independence era; in case of China, since

whenever communism and the will to become a world power took root there on a enormousscale.) that not only magnified the effects, but have made it difficult for the dissidents to pursue

their own interests. Plus I'll try to speculate on your questions along with posing my own, and

then attempting myself to speculate on them.

As was already mentioned by you, the signals of the 'disaster' (or not really a 'disaster', but I'll

talk about it later.) began springing up as early as in 1905 (the foundation was already laid by the

monarchy). But in light of the freedom struggle, any measures or appeals were bound to fail and

in the end take a twisted form, and why not? More than independence, more than education, itwas the livelihood that mattered (and matters today) to all the mass. I am inclined to believe that

it was only and only when the (most, or at least many) people had a sense of being exploited and



losing their livelihood (through education, else you got incidents like the Chauri-Chaura

agitation) they came forward to the struggle. Until everything was going on well, who cares?Who cares if we're mere tools to them, until they are just seemingly keeping us well off and our

livelihood and our religious practices and 'prathas' remain intact? And after all, the 'white men'

were the 'superior ones'.

On top of it, the society was shrouded with the ubiquitous superstitious practices and 'prathas',

which didn't help at all. Although the British did engage in abolishing some of these (the likes of

the Sati pratha) they remained deliberately ignorant of others – why, it was advantageous tothem! These practices forced a large part of education to be deemed hazardous and thus, to be

ignored. (Remember, I'm talking about the general Indian society, of course, there were those

who were well educated and understood what was going on. The leaders. And these leaders arethe ones we are lacking today, for reasons reasonable enough.)

Now shall we construct the building faster? World War II, British exploitation smacking us in the

face, the rise of Gandhian leaders, the continuously increasing sense of patriotism, which was

channelled into all the spheres of society by the leaders and grew into a formidable movement:culminated in the free India. We were free from the foreign exploiters, and under the indigenous

ones, like perhaps the planet where the scorching summer has said adieu, but the chilling winteris not far behind, and the summer is already awaiting its return, with a vengeance?

The free India was so got to be fraught with the most hideous of them problems: overpopulation.In Ray Bradbury's style, More people, Less voluminous the world, Kick! Punch! Fight!

Compete! More people, lesser schools, hospitals, facilities, money. Competition rose. The rat-

race. Earning became the priority. There were always too much takers for jobs, and only some of

them were lucrative which made it even more bad, and those who couldn't make it had only oneoption – their progeny. The new generation, grown amidst poverty and dire conditions, had no

choice, but to support their families.

Besides overpopulation, there was a perpetual sense of insecurity, due to acute poverty, socialinstability in the initial years of independence, and aggravating relations with Pakistan and

China. A well-paying job gave you just enough security, and prosperity to live a satiating life.

We don't need textual references to corroborate this mentality, an interview with someone elder

about their youth life will do. (In this case, the last two paragraphs are based on my discussions

with my family members and they pertain to the 1970s-1990s.) I bet you can picturize the sceneof a middle-class family, in the 1980s, full of mirth, happiness bestowed upon them on the

occasion of the son bagging a reputed job.

But, sigh, it has to be admitted, this was not at all something one might call 'preventable withnecessary foresight': it was inevitable. And it was necessary. We were poor and 'education' was

the only legitimate means of earning money. There's no denying that. And knowing the condition

of the country at that time, it's hard to condemn it (although there were still enough people whocame out of dire poverty to spawn revolutions). But, as mentioned in the last paragraph, the

repercussions were severe. History repeated itself. The elitist, and the 'not-so-elitist' group

became more distant from each other. And there's was the constant desire yet again, to pierce



your way through to the top. And it was made much easier by the education system – or you can

have it the other way, the education system was made to make it easier. And in 1990s, after theNew Economic Policy, capitalism began working its magic. Coaching centers for everything to

prepare you for reaching to the top. Businessman raking in the moolah. Education became a

multi-million dollars business. Competition rose and rose.

In the 21st century, owing to this globalisation and capitalism, competition kept on soaring and

under the hands of corruption, which ran hand in hand with them, our basic foundations were

definitely cracked. We were erecting skyscrapers upon jagged roads. Upon malnourishedchildren. Upon uneducated masses. Upon forests. Upon mines. Upon education.

What happened was, what, what would happen if an average passer-by comes across a lavishbuilding, with every luxury imaginable, every happiness, every comfort inside. They would want

to enter the building, merge himself in the 'happiness' and never come out. But to enter, they

need VIP passes, numbers of which are limited, more than of those aspiring to get in. There's no

place as lavish nearby, unlike the developed countries where there is one beside every crossroad.

And the cost of the passes is our one and only currency, education. More education they have,more chances they have of earning the chance. And thus begins the race to enter the luxurious

world.

Herein lies the main problem, main cause of our maladies. To filter out people on the basis of

their education. On lower levels, it does not really matter much, because there is a clear'distinction' between who has better education and who has not. We can tell it by their social

behaviour, their demeanour, to an extent, and there seems to be a literacy rate 'line' (which is

absurd anyway). Moving a little upwards, there is still some scope of distinction, as education of

different people is again homogeneous (again, with exceptions). But moving more upwards,about above the lower middle-class, the concept of education becomes convoluted and complex,

because this is where the heterogeneity begins. A proper definition of education ceases to exist,

only an abstract fragment floats which would run something like “education is the ability of a

person to develop and put forth his own ideas and so on.....”, and hence, ceases to exist a methodof gaining education – it becomes relative to the person pursuing it. And hence, the method of

evaluating the 'more' educated properly becomes primordial. What was till now objective

knowledge has transformed into complex subjective opinions – or at least has started to. Andthey need to be evaluated using a new method which is an amalgamation of subjective opinions

and objective knowledge. But alas! the previous method of evaluation had one main feature. It

decreased social fluidity, at least the downward movement. Once you were up there you were notvery likely to plummet down again. And this brought what? A spoonful of stability in the upper

echelons. Stability is favourable, and it brought along with it appreciation from international

lords, which convinced us we were on the right path. The result was we resisted any change,

despite the 'talk' about new ideas and the golden India shimmered with its doctors, engineers andbusiness administrators throughout the world. And thus the objective system of analysis

continued, the system which thrives on a definite concrete-hard interpretation of a concept, issue

or any other thing; the system to move up in which entailed memorizing of these interpretation;the system which paved way for tools and human robots, who were not only controlled by their

controllers, but were convinced that they had nothing else to do.



Thus, today we are in need of a revolution, not only in the system, but in the basic mentality of

the people towards education. We also need a diversion from prejudices and biases which plagueour society. They are inversely proportional to education. But it's easier said than is done. The

reason: as much as the number of skyscrapers has proliferated, other problems have started

creeping out. Corruption, undoubtedly has increased manifold; the rich-poor gap has furthered;

prejudices are still intact; crime-rates have increased (you must have read that in 40 years(1970s-2000s), the number of rapes in India has proliferated by 792% and rate of justice

decreased); Patriotism has become hypocrisy and ignorance (with exceptions).

There have been dissidents and remarkable increase in out-of-the-box thinking, and extra-

curricular activity outside of the academic, but all but few migrated. With my knowledge of

history of science and literature, I can vouch that such people don't care where they reside aslong as it gives them the space and time to fulfill their passions. And I see it reasonable enough.

Those who didn't were either the lucky rare ones, who had the support of their families, or those

who struggled to fulfill their dreams.

There remains so much to be said and so much to be asked and so much to be explored and somuch to be answered. I apologize I haven't really speculated on your questions (except the

factors precipitating the crisis). And that I haven't laid my views as coherently as I wished to. ButI'm too tired to write more, before a reply from you, and I don't want to torment you with too

much of my 'preposterous ramblings'.

PS: I agree with the three conclusions you pointed out, here.

A>

tracing the roots

Documents