Anarchists stoking campus unrest – K. G. Suresh

AISA at JNU

K. G. SureshPseudo intellectuals who have made a fortune through the liberal largesse of successive governments in the past, are finding themselves cornered today with the new regime strictly implementing academic discipline and norms. – K. G. Suresh

A planned, deliberate exercise is being undertaken by sections of frustrated, desperate and ideologically isolated faculty and students to denigrate and destabilise prestigious educational institutions, including universities, across the country. That these anarchist elements, who have enjoyed the fruits of power over the last several decades at the cost of academic discipline, accountability and standards, are becoming unnerved by the loss of their empire, is evident from the artificial protests and propaganda being unleashed from time to time ever since a new dispensation has taken over the reins at the Raisina Hill.

From Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in the north and Film and Television Institute of India in the west, to Hyderabad University in the south and Jadavpur University in the east, these elements have been trying to foment trouble and orchestrate campaigns over flimsy issues to project the government and its appointees as anti-Dalit, anti-women and anti-minorities, in connivance with fellow travellers in the media.

The pattern is the same. The foot soldiers of an ideology, which carried out the inhuman purge in Russia, the ruthless cultural revolution in China, the ethnic cleansing in Tibet, the gross human rights violations in Siberia and Xinjiang, the suppression of democracy by crushing students under military tanks in Tiananmen Square, have become ironically the self-proclaimed champions of democracy and human rights in India.

From Gajendra Chauhan to Pahlaj Nihalani and B. B. Kumar, among others, all appointees of the present regime are portrayed as ‘mediocre’, agents of the RSS and accused of saffronisation. The spit-and-run tactics of these foreign-funded activists in the garb of academics and students include making wild, sweeping, unsubstantiated allegations the moment any effort is made to make them accountable or disciplined.

They are trying to build a new narrative—that students should be consulted before the appointment of any head of the institution, and administration should not take any decision without taking faculty into confidence, even on non-academic matters. Any effort to make them accountable, including insistence on biometric attendance, is outrightly rejected. Any attempt to get vacated their long-held positions or ineligible occupation of hostels are construed as undemocratic acts, and licence to abuse is touted as freedom of speech and expression.

These pseudo intellectuals, who have made a fortune through the liberal largesse of successive governments in the past, are finding themselves cornered today with the new regime strictly implementing academic discipline and norms.

Over the years, they had penetrated every institution thanks to undeserving patronage extended to them by their godfathers. In the process, they also ensured that those who disagreed with their world view were denied their due. Being a nationalist became the albatross around the neck of many deserving academics. Nobody talked about their freedom of thought and expression—their academic freedom. They were at the receiving end in academic appointments and promotions. The nation’s academia was dominated by a mafia, which determined their fate and pushed them into the netherworld with contempt and ruthlessness.

The current protests and propaganda are only acts of desperation by these so-called scholars who have realised that their time is over, their game is up and the golden days of their dominance over national institutions are no more. The crusade undertaken by institutions such as JNU to remove the scourge of political untouchability, discrimination and apartheid that have been pursued over the last several decades, must be appreciated by all right-thinking people and supported by the government. Only then can Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s dream of a New India be fully realised. – The New Indian Express, 16 July 2017

» K. G. Suresh is the Director General of the Indian Institute of Mass Communication in New Delhi.

AISA anti-national protest at JNU

Video: Decolonizing the Indian Civil Services – Rajiv Malhotra

Rajiv Malhotra says,

“In this talk, I analyze the ridiculous syllabus which is still being followed in UPSC exams to select government officials in India. Young civil servants are chosen through this ultra-leftist ideology controlled by breaking India forces. There is a blatant lack of balanced perspective.

“No wonder this ideology governs the mindset of many Indian diplomats, IAS officers, tax, police and various organs of the government.

“How ridiculous that Sheldon Pollock, Ananya Vajpeyi and various other anti-India ideologues are being hoisted as intellectuals, and our youth are required to understand and quote them. This awareness must spread. Please make this video viral.

“I am also troubled that the new government has not changed the ideology built into the college-level humanities and social sciences. All the bombastic manthans and gatherings about ‘decolonizing’ are useless exercises in self-promotion by some activists.”

India’s Culture Wars – Gautam Sen

PK

Gautam SenVirtually no practising Hindu is allowed to hold a major appointment in any US or British university in Hindu studies, with such positions invariably occupied by its most unsparing detractors, whether at Harvard, Chicago, Columbia or Oxbridge or London. … Thus, the absurdly traitorous Indian Leftist hostility toward their homeland and their own culture found a sympathetic intellectual terrain abroad. – Dr Gautam Sen

The foremost source of unrelenting and egregious slander against Hindus is India’s film industry, led by Bollywood. Pakistani marauders were halted at the border in 1948 and repudiated every time subsequently, but its surrogates managed to seize control of India’s film industry. The economics of film making, forbidding bona fide investment until recently, allowed the Muslim underworld and its associates to infiltrate the industry by funding it. They were able to dictate the agenda of the film industry, insinuating a thoroughly anti national ideology and institute a standing critique of all things Hindus as well as propagate blatant and slanderous lies. Producers and directors became their playthings and selected artistes found a privileged entry in exchange of reciprocal favours that included every type of venal personal degradation.

Villains of every description, from torturers, rapists, murderers and espousers of every retrograde social custom, somehow sport a tilak and worship some incomprehensibly weird Hindu deity. By contrast, the gentle Muslim neighbour or preacher or Christian priest epitomises generosity and brotherhood. Both unfailingly reach out to look after the confused Hindu facing some personal crisis and resolving some tricky problem engendered by their own absurd religious prejudices. The abandoned Hindu mother, brutally trampled underfoot by her devout Hindu mother-in-law, always finds a teaching job in a Christian school, Bollywood Brahminunder the mellow guidance of a mother superior. In Tollywood, Bengali society is often depicted terrorising an educated and independent Hindu girl, in love with a Muslim boy from a humble background, also in keeping with the illusory egalitarian ethos peddled by Bengal’s neutered cultural elite. There are exceptions of course, but they truly underline the contrary rule of demonization.

And ever-present are the caste ridden evil Brahmin, much the way Jews were portrayed by god fearing Christian Europe, before the Nazis resolved the problem in inimitable fashion through mass murder. In addition to the horrors of caste in Indian society, the timeless lament at the Hindu society’s mistreatment of women and a penchant for infanticide, standard fare of colonial conquerors, before they too addressed the problem through genocide and looting. Class oppression has been another favoured theme, tearfully underlined by privileged cine artistes, themselves living in stupendous luxury, the richest among them today worth in excess of US$ 750 million. Yet rarely, if ever, a whisper about the fate of women in India or indeed elsewhere under the medieval jackboot of the Sharia or the truculent determination of the faithful to extract the last pound of flesh, loudspeakers blaring the call to prayer before dawn and major thoroughfares routinely blocked during Friday prayer.

This unforgiving depiction of Hindus, their culture and history has been thoroughly imbibed by the Hindu society itself. The default of the Hindu psyche has been apology for who they are and instinctive defence of their critics as the wronged party in Indian society. The popular ideology of Bollywood has its faithful counterpart in books used in Indian schools and university curricula. They are apparently consciously designed to create self-doubt, if not subliminal self-loathing of their past, their cultural and spiritual identity. Indeed, these pedestrian texts reflexively question the very basis of Indian nationhood. Much of the work of post independent history is studiously silent on critical issues of India’s painful past, actively denunciatory of alternative perspectives and slanderous of their authors, however renowned and scholarly. Their own material is usually slyly dishonest and rarely impartial and all designed to supposedly promote communal harmony by telling blatant untruths. These morally bankrupt historians ignore the bitter travails of the entire millennia of unspeakable horrors, mass murder and slavery and point instead to the alleged evils of conquered Hindu society.

Rohan Narayana Murty & Sheldon PollockThe bedrock of self-hatred, dispensed by India’s secular elites, found a powerful echo abroad that compounded the severity of the impact on Indian society. The Anglo-American and European contempt for India arose from deep-seated historical impulses and India’s reluctance to join the aggressive Western Cold War campaign against communism. The British had also held India’s Hindu elites responsible for the patriotic fervour that eventually led to their ejection from India. Its roots can be traced back to the late nineteenth century and British sponsorship of the Muslim League that culminated in the conspiratorial relationship with Mohammed Ali Jinnah almost fifty years later, to deliver the coup de grace of partition. Virtually all British social science and academic scholarship on India and, as its obverse, Pakistan, was intentionally complicit in the project to demonise India. Its potent influence can be found in their abiding hostility towards India and Hindus to this day, led by British universities, their media and its particular ubiquitous incarnation, spreading half-truths and vicious canards.

India’s refusal to join the US-led Cold War alliance played a crucial role in the West’s hostility towards India, though now waning in dramatic ways, as illustrated vividly in the recent days. In addition, Indians, unlike the Chinese, were viewed as enslaved people and unworthy of assimilation to the status of white or the honorary category accorded to some by South African apartheid. This undoubted racism informed the perceptions of the US policy makers and the British dominance of hostile scholarship on India also became the template that spread across the Atlantic. Virtually no practising Hindu is allowed to hold a major appointment in any US or British university in Hindu studies, with such positions invariably occupied by its most unsparing detractors, whether at Harvard, Chicago, Columbia or Oxbridge or London. The contrast with sympathetic and accommodating attitudes towards scholarship on Islam or China could not be more unambiguous. Thus, the absurdly traitorous Indian Leftist hostility toward their homeland and their own culture found a sympathetic intellectual terrain abroad. Both combined to institute an unholy and improbable alliance of supposed Indian anti-imperialists and its most brutal historic purveyors globally against India. – IndiaFacts, 8 October 2-16

HINDUS PROTEST DEMONSTRATION AGAINST PROFESSOR DONIGER AGAINST ON WEDNESDAY MARCH 10, 2010, IN FRONT OF NEW SCHOOL UNIVERSITY BUILDING ,Dr. Wendy Doniger, Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago Divinity School, will be honored by National Book Critics Circle (NBCC) on March 10th at The New School University Building, New York City for her book titled Hindus An Alternative History...PIC Mohammed Jaffer-SnapsIndia

How G. H. Hardy tamed Srinivasa Ramanujan’s genius – Béla Bollobás

Deva Patel as Srinivasa Ramanuja at Trinity College, Cambridge, UK

Prof Béla Bollobás“It was clear to Hardy that Ramanujan was totally exceptional: however, in spite of his amazing feats in mathematics, he lacked the basic tools of the trade of a professional mathematician. Hardy knew that if Ramanujan was to fulfil his potential, he had to have a solid foundation in mathematics, at least as much as the best Cambridge graduates.” – Prof Béla Bollobás

Throughout the history of mathematics, there has been no one remotely like Srinivasa Ramanujan. There is no doubt that he was a great mathematician, but had he had simply a good university education and been taught by a good professor in his field, we wouldn’t have a film about him (video below).

As the years pass, I admire more and more the astonishing body of work Ramanujan produced in India before he made contact with any top mathematicians. Not because the results he got at the time changed the face of mathematics, far from it, but because, working by himself, he fearlessly attacked many important and some not so important problems in analysis and, especially, number theory – simply for the love of mathematics.

It cannot be understated, however, the role played by Ramanujan’s tutor Godfrey Harold Hardy in his life story. The Cambridge mathematician worked tirelessly with the Indian genius, to tame his creativity within the then current understanding of the field. It was only with Hardy’s care and mentoring that Ramanujan became the scholar we know him as today.

Srinivasa RamanujanDetermined and obsessed

In December 1903, at the age of 16, Ramanujan passed the matriculation exam for the University of Madras. But as he concentrated on mathematics to the exclusion of all other subjects, he did not progress beyond the second year. In 1909, he married a nine-year-old girl, but failed to secure any steady income until the beginning of 1912, when he became a clerk in the Madras Port Trust office on a meagre salary.

All this time, Ramanujan remained obsessed with mathematics and kept working on continued fractions, divergent series, elliptic integrals, hypergeometric series and the distribution of primes. By 1911, Ramanujan was desperate to gain recognition from leading mathematicians, especially those in England. So, at the beginning of 1913, when he was just past 25, he dispatched a letter to Hardy in Cambridge with a long list of his discoveries—a letter which changed both their lives.

Although only 36 when he received Ramanujan’s letter, Hardy was already the leading mathematician in England. The mathematical scene in England in the first half of the 20th century was dominated by Hardy and another titan of Trinity College, J. E. Littlewood. The two formed a legendary partnership, unique to this day, writing an astounding 100 joint papers. They were instrumental in turning England into a superpower in mathematics, especially in number theory and analysis.

Hardy was not the first mathematician to whom Ramanujan had sent his results, however the first two to whom he had written judged him to be a crank. But Hardy was not only an outstanding mathematician, he was also a wonderful teacher, eager to nurture talent.

G. H. HardyGenius unknown

After dinner in Trinity one evening, some of the fellows adjourned to the combination room. Over their claret and port Hardy mentioned to Littlewood some of the claims he had received in the mail from an unknown Indian. Some assertions they knew well, others they could prove, others they could disprove, but many they found not only fascinating and unusual but also impossible to resolve.

This toing and froing between Hardy and Littlewood continued the next day and beyond, and soon they were convinced that their correspondent was a genius. So Hardy sent an encouraging reply to Ramanujan, which led to a frequent exchange of letters.

It was clear to Hardy that Ramanujan was totally exceptional: however, in spite of his amazing feats in mathematics, he lacked the basic tools of the trade of a professional mathematician. Hardy knew that if Ramanujan was to fulfil his potential, he had to have a solid foundation in mathematics, at least as much as the best Cambridge graduates.

It was for Ramanujan’s good that Hardy invited him to Cambridge, then, and he was taken aback when, due to caste prejudices, Ramanujan did not jump at the chance. As a Brahmin, Ramanujan was not allowed to cross the ocean and his mother was totally opposed to the idea of the voyage. When, in early 1914, Ramanujan gained his mother’s consent, Hardy swung into action. He asked E. H. Neville, another fellow of Trinity College, who was on a serendipitous trip to Madras, to secure Ramanujan a scholarship from the University of Madras. Neville’s wrote in a letter to the university that “the discovery of the genius of S. Ramanujan of Madras promises to be the most interesting event of our time in the mathematical world …”

Ramanujan's original work booksRamanujan sailed for England in the company of Neville, and arrived in Cambridge in April 1914.

Fearless mentoring

I cannot but admire Hardy for his care in mentoring Ramanujan. His main worry was how to teach this astounding talent much mathematics without destroying his confidence. The last thing Hardy wanted was to dent Ramanujan’s fearless approach to the most difficult problems. To quote Hardy:

The limitations of his knowledge were as startling as its profundity. Here was a man who could work out modular equations, and theorems of complex multiplication, to orders unheard of, whose mastery of continued fractions was, on the formal side at any rate, beyond that of any mathematician in the world…. It was impossible to ask such a man to submit to systematic instruction, to try to learn mathematics from the beginning once more.

On the other hand there were things of which it was impossible that he would remain in ignorance … so I had to try to teach him, and in a measure I succeeded, though I obviously learnt from him much more than he learnt from me.

For almost three years, things went extremely well. In 1916 Ramanujan got his BA from Cambridge and his research went from strength to strength. He published one excellent paper after another, with a great deal of Hardy’s help in the proofs and presentation. They also collaborated on several great projects, and published wonderful joint papers. Sadly, in the spring of 1917 Ramanujan fell ill, and was in and out of sanatoria for the rest of his stay in Cambridge.

By early 1919 Ramanujan seemed to have recovered sufficiently, and decided to travel back to India. Hardy was alarmed not to have heard from him for a considerable time, but a letter in February 1920 made it clear that Ramanujan was very active in research.

Ramanujan’s letter contained some examples of his latest discovery, mock theta functions, which have turned out to be very important. A main conjecture about them was solved 80 years later, and these functions are now seen as interesting examples of a much larger class of mock modular forms in mathematics, which have applications to elliptic curves, Borcherds products, Eichler cohomology and Galois representations – and the nature of black holes.

Sadly, Ramanujan’s recovery was short-lived. His illness returned and killed him, aged just 32, on April 26, 1920, leaving him only a short time to benefit from his fellowship of the Royal Society and fellowship of Trinity.

Ramanujan’s death at the height of his powers was a tremendous blow to mathematics. His like may never be seen again, and certainly such a partnership as that which Hardy and Ramanujan built will not either.

» Béla Bollobás is a Professor of Pure Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, UK

Srinivasa Ramanujan (centre) at Cambridge

G. H. Hardy Quote

See also

VIDEO: The Makarand Paranjape Interview – Newsd

The Makarand Paranjape Interview: Nationalism & Campus Politics.
Prof Makarand Paranjape is an Indian poet and teaches English at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

See also: Some questions for Kanhaiya, Leftists and JNU – Makarand R. Paranjape