What Went Wrong In The History of India

For those who do not learn from history, history teaches them a lesson at a great cost.
We - the Indians - neither create history nor read history, and so writing the history is far from even dreaming of. Therefore, more often than not, we became silent spectators and slaves praising the people who made marks in history. History is repeated every often because we never read it and so never learn anything whatsoever. We do not have a record of history beyond 2000 years because we never found it worth writing and keeping a record of. No wonder, books of history give us their viewpoint – biased – written by either Mughals as Babarnama, British or Chinese student Hu-En-Sang. It was not before 1000 years that Indian scholar Acharya Hemchandra wrote Siddh-Hem telling a total history of the said period of Kind Siddhraj Jaisinh rule. Again, a blackout occurred.

Before coming to what went wrong in our history, I must briefly explain how politics in India evolved.

Evolution of politics in India:
  • Gan Rajya: 2600 years back, we had Gan Rajya where the state was ruled by a group of people elected by the public. The King was elected out of them. So there was no birth-right that made any one a King. In this system, corruption and in-fighting started. Ultimately inheritance and birth-right led to becoming King.
  • Brahmins: Now, I should tell you about Brahmins who invented the caste-system in the Vedic period. They divided the total population into four groups according to the profession. Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Sudra. The fourth in the series – Sudra – was asked to do service as a servant. Initially, caste-system was on the basis of the work done by the individual and not on the basis of inheritance, which later on turned to birth. The caste-system made a class of superior and inferior human. The insulting and inhuman mannerism of untouchability entered. Bhagwan Mahaveer in Jainism and Buddha in Buddhism corrected this telling all men are same.
  • Kings: In Magadha Kingdom, the first ever big state having 80,000 villages king Bimbisar ruled as one belonging to Shishunag dynasty. He was killed by his san Ajatsatru who ruled as a king. Similarly, all six kings were killed by their sons to become king earlier. Seeing all these non-sense killings, people got fed up. They installed one minister as King. The last King in this dynasty Dhananad insulted his minister – Chanakya. Chanakya (321 BC) found out Chandragupta Maurya (321 BC – 296 BC) and became his advisor, guide and mentor. Chandragupta became the king of Patliputra (Patna). Chanakya said if the King is industrious – hard-working – people of his reign will be so.
  • Jaichand: in 1192, Jaichand alias Jaichandra Rathod of Kannauj invited Mohammed Ghori; went to his camp to tell war-plans of Prithviraj and secrets of their army. Invader Mohammed Ghori easily won the battle. Poor India then became the Islamic nation in no time.
  • Mir Jafar: In 1757, Mohammed Jafar Ali Khan Bahadur (Mir Jafar) – then chief of the army in Nawab Siraj-Ud-Daula of Bengal rule – had lust and ambition to become Nawab. He became traitor and did a breach of trust in the war of Plasi. So company head British Robert Clive won the battle and established British rule over India in no time to pass.

We are always divided and those two segments never unit – I am talking about,
  • Caste: Hindu higher caste and Hindy lower caste of Harijans.
  • Religion: Hindu, Muslim, Christian, etc.
  • Economic groups: Rich – higher income group and Poor – meagre or low-income group.
  • Qualification: Highly qualified and illiterate.
  • Gender: Male and female.
Imaginary gap and distance are so much that unification of either of above is nearly impossible. This tells us – we are never united as one nation – patriotism is strictly limited to the books. For personal gains, we are ready to be traitor and do any breach of trust. Jaichand brought Mughals and Mir Jafar brought British as rulers of India. Agreed. But today as well, the scene is no different. All are ready to become either or Jaichand or Mir Jafar.

Why independent India is ruled by a single family?

All this detailed explanation telling about our mentality – psychology – of being impressed by non-Indians – foreigners, especially one having less darker skin colour, leads to the conclusion that we can easily be ruled by others. I am not going to the extreme of telling we can easily be made slaves. So, present day rule of Congress led by Sonia Gandhi and her son Rahul Gandhi is no exception to this. The single-family birth-right rule fits in the past and their dominance on the total Indian public is just natural.

Well, do I want to learn something from the History? As expected, if negative answer follows, we are born to live as slaves and second-grade citizen in our own country - if not Moghals or British as in past – Americans, Russians or any who want to dominate us. We are hardworking, intelligent and great administrators. What will act is will to learn the art of self-respect and self-discipline. Why should I feel inferior? Why should I ask anyone (say Americans) about policies of our nation? If this will continue, dominance by all around like Americans, Pakistanis or Chinese or any is not far to fetch.

Who can help us? Nobody? Oneself? I don’t know. You tell me...

Image source: our-india.com

Post a Comment


  1. Hmmm.... so thus we write!

    Being an ardent lover of the mighty English language, I could not help but cringe at the grammatical error in the very first line of the blog.

    Nevertheless, as I read further, your inability to use English properly was evident in full glory.

    I always believe one should write in the language one is most comfortable with. Trying to use a language in which one is not proficient leads to a massacre of content.

    The photograph chosen for the blog smacks of your political leanings which for an apolitical person like me doesn't matter, but at the same time lends bias to your presentation.

    The most disconcerting part of this blog is its lack of coherence. The unifying thread of theory is missing in the write-up.

    Nevertheless, good try, Doc! Will try to read more of your writings.

    Ek Anavil


      I thank you for your comment.
      Well, I am happy about criticism.
      I am sure you must be expert in the subject.


    2. Aasav, (if that means anything worthy)

      Only if you had any knowledge of blogging, online publishing, or this subject matter to begin with. Your anonymity speaks for your lack of knowledge and more importantly the insubstantial personality you must be struggling with. My sympathies to your family and the people who must put up with a waste of a human being, a classic worthless-spineless-arrogant an 'Anavil' you are!

      I can write more if you need more soup of the 'mighty English' language... Do write back.


Thank you for your comment!