Yesterday, I went to an interesting film and discussion regarding some Hindu nationalists' agenda to dictate how Indian history is presented in California textbooks. The gist of it is that they want to deny the Aryan Invasion Theory, and portray Hinduism as one unified, perfect religion that was indigenous to the land -- thereby suggesting that Muslims and Christians were foreign invaders that upset this egalitarian utopia.

Obviously, these nationalists want to incite global pride in what they perceive as their spotless ancient civilization and moreover scapegoat religious minorities for all the country's ills. The history they hope to write is patently false and misleading; the caste system was not merely descriptive, as they claim, but hierarchical and discriminatory. There was no gender equality. And whether Hinduism was fostered from within or outside of the land, there is ample evidence to support the existence of civilization preceding it, and moreover, there have always been so many diverse local traditions and ways of practicing "Hinduism" that it doesn't even make sense to suggest it was ever one religion. In fact, it's even odd to force one "Indian" identity, because our clothing, foods, languages, and customs span more diversity than Europe. (Although, thanks and no thanks to globalization and Bollywood, that gap is slowly closing. ;()

But all that said -- and with emphasizing the need not to romanticize the Hindus and/or "Aryans" as the pure, original ones and construct "The Other" against which to pit them -- I am equally skeptical of the agenda that could be fueling some groups' and individuals' support for the AIT, and not entirely appeased by this explanation of why endorsing AIT does not have possible racist implications --

But, how does the place of origin of Aryans provide *any* superiority to *any* race? It does so, *only* if the lens through which you are looking at history has already been distorted by Hindutva�if you believe that peoples who can trace their geneology all the way to India have somehow more claims to its citizenship, than others whose geneologies can be traced to areas outside the current-political boundaries.

Well, the whole citizenship/entitlement angle is certainly not the type of lens through which I have any interest in looking. However, I could see lots of fucked up people including the historians from which most of the evidence stems having fucked up reasons to advocate the notion that Sanskrit, Vedic philosophy and medicine, and the whole deal resulted from whitey intervention. The necessity of white people for these developments feeds into a white supremacist agenda pretty nicely, and, after all, they take pride in colonizing and suppressing the inferior others, so those aspects could also be strapped on with pride. I mean, I think Sanskrit and Vedic astrology and the Hindu epic myths and Kalidasa are pretty dope, and I'd like to give my peeps a fair shot at having birthed them. Of course, I'd also have to and do accept that my peeps -- I am of an "upper caste" after all -- were assholes in countless, reprehensible ways.

So my question is, why does it have to be an either/or? Either we accept that Hinduism came from white people, OR we allow the rationalization of Hindu nationalism and minority oppression? Isn't it possible that it came from within in various bits and pieces but was blown into this hegemonic and hierarchical monstrosity that we should look at critically, not least because Islam, Buddhism, and Christianity have very ancient historical ties with the land as well? If we really and truly and sincerely believe that the AIT is true and legit, that is one thing, but sometimes I get the feeling we are categorically embracing it just to avoid rationalizing Hindu nationalism, and that irritates me because it mirrors what the nationalists are doing, which is categorically denying it in order to suggest a position that is not a necessary or rational conclusion. We should be able to evaluate the historical merits of the theory alongside a criticism of the way its advocates and opponents alike deploy it to further their agendas. Hrmph.

Anyway, I'm gonna read this by Romila Thapar later tonight instead of thinking more out of my ass.