Boss, read the true history of India before speaking

Boss, read the true history before speaking
By S Gurumurthy
06th April 2013 07:41 AM

Nine years after advent in public life, Rahul Gandhi addressed the Confederation of the Indian Industry [CII]. Media conferred on him the title ‘Boss’. The Boss told captains of industry: “They used to look at India and say, Boss, the Hindu rate of Growth. They have been saying like this for 3,000 years. Now the Hindu Rate of growth is like the European rate of growth’. This less serious comment calls for serious response. Otherwise illiteracy about India will continue to persist for lack of literacy among Indians who speak for India. But, it calls for a peep into the world and the Indian economic history which most Indian academics, particularly economists, seem to be least interested in and therefore less aware of.

The label ‘Hindu rate of growth’ was coined by Professor Rajkrishna, a socialist establishment economist, in 1978 to rationalise why India was growing ‘slowly’ despite following the socialist prescriptions. Raj Krishna’s label was original but its philosophy was borrowed. It all originated in the colonial discourse on India. A notable victim of colonial discourse on India was Karl Marx. Even before he brought out his magnum opus Das Kapital, Karl Marx wrote an article on the Indian economy [June 25, 1853] in New York Harold Tribune. In his article, he was generally positive about the distinct ‘Hindoo’ India’s village system of agriculture and manufacturing which, he said, gave to people their independent organisation and social life. But he said that that had made India changeless for two thousand years. So the British, he said, were doing the right thing, though painful, causing a social revolution by demolishing the village system which Marx described as ‘semi-barbarian and semi-civilised’. Why semi-barbarian and semi-civilised?

Not because the village economic model was wrong per se, but, because, Marx said, the Hindoos were worshipping cows and monkeys and were even claiming antiquity greater than Christianity’s! Karl Marx, who never came to India, never met any informed Indian, nor read any worthwhile Indian literature dismissed India as a semi-barbarian. His knowledge about India was limited colonial records on India. Then came Max Weber. He had theorised that only Protestant Christian societies could progress under modern capitalist model since Protestantism alone promoted individualism and enterprise. He was entitled to his comment because he had studied the rise of America and European protestant nations as compared to the Catholic countries which had stagnated. But he impertinently wrote in late 1920s that India and China, which followed Hindu-Buddhist faiths, would not succeed under capitalist model because they believed in karma, rebirth and caste. He too never went to India, perhaps never met a proper Indian, but still adversely commented on Hinduism and Buddhism. Studies have established that the Marx and Weber theories had exerted the greatest influence on Indian academic, sociological and economic thinking. In the same stream of thought, Winston Churchill called Indians anarchic and barbaric. After freedom J K Galbraith described India as a functioning anarchy. Professor Rajkrishna’s remark was the Indian affirmation of this thought stream that held Hinduism guilty for keeping semi-barbaric and under-developed. This is what the Boss also has recalled in his CII speech.

But this colonial theory was proved fake in 1983 — exactly five years after Rajkrishna trashed Hinduism for India’s low growth. In that year Paul Bairoch, a Belgian economist, came out with his study of the world economy and his findings astounded the West. He said that in 1750 India’s share of world GDP was 24.5 per cent, China’s 33 per cent, but the combined share of Britain and the US was – believe it – just two per cent. Yes only two per cent!

India’s share, Bairoch found, fell to 20 per cent in 1800; to 18 per cent in 1830; and finally crashed to 1.7 per cent in 1900, while China’s crashed to 6.2 per cent from 33 per cent. In these 150 years, the combined share of Britain and the US rose to from 2 per cent to over 41 per cent. Bairoch shook the West by saying that in middle 19th century, the West had a lower standard of living than Asians – read Indians and Chinese. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD], network of rich nations, forthwith constituted a Development Institute Studies under Angus Maddisson, a great economic historian, to conduct a comprehensive research into economic history – the implied agenda was to prove Bairoch wrong.

Angus Maddisson postulated, ‘if Bairoch is right, then much more of the backwardness of the third world presumably has to be explained by colonial exploitation’ and ‘much less of Europe’s advantage can be due to scientific precocity, centuries of slow accumulation, and organisational and financial superiority’. After two decades of hard work, Maddision published his studies titled ‘World Economic History – A Millennial Perspective in 2001’.

His study confirmed Bairoch’s study of 150 years and more, as Maddisson studied the entire 2000 years economic history. Maddisson showed that India was the leading economic power of the world from the 1st year of the first millennium till 1700 – with 32 per cent share of world’s GDP in the first 1000 years and 28 per cent to 24 per cent in the second millennium till 1700.

China was second to India except in 1600 when China temporarily overtook India. India again overtook China in 1700. The global economic play was in the hands of India and China till 1830. And two nations disqualified for development by Weber for following Hindu and Buddhist religions. Maddison confirmed, actually confessed, that [Hindu] India fell only due to colonial exploitation. Now the Maddisson study, endorsed by OECD, is the most authentic economic history of the world. What does it prove? The Hindu rate of growth had kept India going as the most powerful economy of the world for 1850 years out of 2000 years. That is why William Dalrymple described the rise of India ‘as the empire striking back’ — meaning that India’s rise was not rags to riches story.

The Bairoch-Maddisson studies have sealed the discourse decades back. Their studies have also been corroborated by other studies and records. Some of them are: studies into the Mayuran export-led economic Model Hindu India [American Journal of Economics and Sociology April 1993]; study into consumption during Akbar’s regime as being higher than in Europe by Centre for West Asia Studies Jamia Milia Islamia University; the Economic History of Greco-Roman World which described how two thousand years ago India was bankrupting Roman Egypt of its gold reserves by its export surplus; the history of Indian merchant navy which had a fleet strength of 40,000 ships in Akbar’s time and as many as 34,000 ships before the British arrived and the Bank of International Settlements [BIS] Annual report of 1934-35 which said that between 1493 and 1930 India absorbed 14 per cent of world gold production – which meant that it earned that much export surplus for five centuries continuously.

QED: Hindu rate of growth had made India super power. Colonialism did India down to poverty. Nehruvian socialism made it stagnate even after freedom.

The slow growth of India was due to Nehruvian socialism. But thanks to Rajkrishna the label Hindu rate of growth was globalised by the World Bank President Robert McNamara in 1980s. He said that India would always be in need of aid and it would ever be a burden on the world.

Another person who carried on the tradition of Marx-Weber-Rajkrishna-McNamara to trivialise Hindu India was Montek Alhuwalia who endorsed Rajkrishna’s description of India even after the 21st century opened. The only exception in the present establishment is Shiv Shankar Menon, the National Security Adviser, who profoundly called India’s rise “re-rise”. Will the Boss begin learning the true history of Hindu rate of growth, not repeat the spurious history when he talks to the FICCI or elsewhere later?

S Gurumurthy is a well-known commentator on political and economic issues. Email:



Filed under Uncategorized

25 responses to “Boss, read the true history of India before speaking

  1. And that idiot said something like this as well: “Japan is a great country and was changed by a gentleman born 3,000 years ago in Bihar”…because he listened.

    That idiot should have known that Buddha had passed away long before Buddhism was introduced in Japan.

    And yes, a man in white horse will come and save India. It is the tenth avatar of Vishnu, Kalki.

  2. @Govind,

    He is not an idiot. He’s much smarter than you.
    Buddhism is a major religion in Japan and yes, it was founded
    by Buddha, in Bihar.

    In a way, it did change Japan when you think about it.
    When most people think of the word “Asia”, what comes into
    their mind is an iconographic image of the Buddha.

    So what if Buddha died long before Buddhism was introduced to
    Japan? It doesn’t change the fact that Buddhism was his idea
    and his contribution to the world. Even the Japanese look up to
    Buddha as their example to follow, and not anybody else.

    There are Buddha statues throughout Japan, honoring the Indian
    monk, Gautam Buddha. So your argument is nonsense.

    • kumar

      If you think Rahul Gandhi is a smart man, I can only feel pity for you.

      • @Kumar,

        I was not complimenting Rahul Gandhi, but the writer Gurumurthy.
        Haven’t you read my posts? I despise Congress party totally.

        I support BJP all the way. I have nothing but contempt for Rahul
        Gandhi and I certainly don’t think he is smart!!

        Apparently, you misunderstood me.

      • Raj Dharm

        I think there is miscommunication. Jaipal was not praising Rahul Gandhi nor was Govind. I think Govind was saying it is an idiocy of Gandhi to say Buddha was listening when Buddha had attained Nirvan long before Buddhism had reached to Japan, so it is lack of literacy for Gandhi to say Buddha was listening physically.

  3. Raj Dharm

    If there are any intelligent and literate leaders in Central or states administration, this article should be made 1st lesson in economy in schools (including state financed Madrasas) and business colleges. No business correspondents or editors should be selected illiterate of the facts given in this article. No illiterate leader should be given a ticket to stand in election or a beurocrate his certificate if he is illiterate of these facts. Also, should be noted that sterile economy minus true political freedom and scientific, military strength is never going to sustain or defend wellbeing and prosperity of the people. The morons who have not digested this economic, cultural (Hindu economic share rate of avaerage 30% for about 1800 years), scientif and military strength relationship should be not eligible to be member of any political party. Although facts are known fo decades, this article identifies the root of illiterate leaders ruling India for most part of 65 years of India”s so called self rule (except of course, Narsingh Rao in Center and Modi and many BJP ruled states, who have this in their blood with confidence in 80% majorities system and civilization.

    • @Raj Dharm,

      The root cause of all this nonsense in India can be traced to
      that cowardly moron Mohandas Gandhi. He is the one who started
      this denigration of Hindu civilization and society, by his Muslim
      appeasement policies. Congress is following the way shown by

      No Hindu worth his/her salt should show any respect to Gandhi.
      That bastard brought untold calamities on Hindus, which we are still
      paying for even today.

      • The biggest damage Gandu Gandhi did was to the psyche of the
        otherwise Heroic Hindu nation.

        The only mistake Nathuram Godse did was that he didn’t kill Gandhi
        much earlier. Otherwise, things could have been different for the better.

  4. Anonymous

    Well written, these lines should be published in the news, newspapers and hoadings, its time we wake up to the TRUTH.

  5. @Anonymous,

    Which write-up are you talking about?

  6. Today, in Modern India, traitors are glorified as national heroes
    whereas the real heroes are villified or ignored.

    We are taught by the Government that Gandhi and Nehru are heroes
    when in reality they were the biggest enemies of Hindu Nation.

    The trinity of real heroes of India should be Sardar Vallabhai Patel,
    Subhash Chandra Bose and Nathuram Godse.

  7. D.Bose

    The author has never read what Karl Marx wrote about India. He has never said Hindus were semi Barbarians, but instead he wrote Mongols, Arabs, Turks, barbarians conquerers being, by the eternal law of history, became Hindoodized after coming to India.

    I am sure the author may have learned his history from NS Rajaram

    • @D. Bose,

      Karl Marx was wrong when he said that India was conquered by Arabs,
      Mongols and Turks and they became Hinduized. This is not true.

      The Arabs failed to conquer India. They were defeated and kept in
      check by the Hindu Pratihara dynasty.

      The Mongols also failed to conquer India. The Indian generals
      and troops repulsed Mongol attacks and foiled their designs
      of Delhi Sultanate in the 13th and 14th centuries. Did you know it?

      The Turks did manage to enter India but even they too were resisted
      and defeated in hundreds of battles and largely killed off on the
      battle field. That is why you don’t see a Turk community in India.

      When did the Arabs, Turks or even Mongols adopt Hindu religion
      and become Hindus?? It never happened. Indian society never
      recognized outsiders as being one of us and always fought to
      eliminate them.

      This notion of absorption of the invader is another colonial
      fiction which was invented to explain the lack of presence of these
      invader groups, simply because, the colonials could not imagine
      the possibility that Hindus could fight and eliminate the enemy
      more or less.

    • ravi

      There are five major reasons for Marxists to be hostile to Hinduism:

      1] The ideological inheritance from Marx.

      2] The opportunistic attempts to make alliances with a motley crew of Indian politicians. Here Communists have not hesitated to form a front with the most corrupt party the country has known, the Congress Party. No doubt with the fast approaching demise of the Congress they will shift to another perch. Their spokesmen have uttered dark hints about keeping communalists (read Hindus) at bay.

      3] The colonial legacy of placing non-Indian ‘experts’ on a pedestal. The fatal flaw of the international movement has been to mindlessly ape Russian and Chinese figures. Along with this is the homage paid to the baleful Christian influences ever present on the subcontinent, from colonial times and now from the international Church (all denominations). The ancient dream of the Christian West has been to convert the world to their dogmas, and here they share the turf with Islam. In India they set up a mythical enemy to be attacked, the mighty fortress of Brahmanism, as described (erroneously) by some Western scholars. The reality is: Veda Agama, a reality which continues to this day and is inaccessible to Indian Marxists because of their tunnel vision. Veda Agama is all around them but they refuse to see it.

      4] Their appeasement policy towards minorities. Intertwined with this is the attempt to whitewash both Muslim and Christian persecution of Hindus and the elevation of Muslim rule in India. A classic example is Romila Thapar’s claim that Mohamed Ghazni was simply a conqueror and destroyed Somnath for that reason, though contemporaneous Muslim accounts state that Ghazni was working for Allah’s mission (‘Somnatha, the many voices of history’ 2005).

      5] Perks, privileges and monetary rewards. Since independence Marxist scholars have cornered the educational scene in India and have been rewarded with key positions there and from those commanding heights have influenced the educational institutions. That wave is ebbing somewhat, but many continue to try to exert their influence even after retirement (see Harbans Mukhia, ‘The Diminishing Returns of Saffron’, The Hindu, April 1, 2013).

  8. The piece by S. Gurumurthy is truly enlightening. It’s time the true history of India is revisited and rewritten in an unbiased manner. The present history text books, orchestrated and written by British imperialists and seconded by our Marxist historians are doing a great damage to the social, cultural and religious fabric of this great nation. It is still being projected in poor light in the comity of nations. It is time distortions and myths such as Aryan Invasion Theory are set right and India’s rich ancient history and heritage are preserved and handed down to the next generation.

    • @NV Sudhakar,

      The only way that we can save India is by forming a Hindu votebank
      that votes solely for a Hindu nationalist party. We can easily rectify
      the above wrongs if Hindus can somehow capture political power.

      This can only be done with a Hindu votebank consolidation.

      It would be a good thing if somehow the Gandhi dynasty members
      were somehow liquidated from the political scene. This would largely
      make the Congress collapse as a political party and pave the way
      for Hindu political power.

      • @Jaipal
        What exactly you mean by ‘if somehow the Gandhi dynasty members were liquidated’? Are you thinking in line with that great Haramjada called Nathuram Godse? Please confirm, otherwise I will have to issue an arrest warrant against you.

  9. Anonymous


  10. Truth Will Prevail

    Law and Order above, chootiya I think you are the type who supports the Caliphate which Gandhi through his weakness supported. Muslim Mullah type in disguise, you Sickularist? If the Caliphate showed up, there wouldn’t be any law and order except for the Sharia law, and you’ll be their loyal slave under Arabian Islam.

  11. A Question

    History of India. If Indians can’t save their own history, why blame the invaders? I noticed one thing about some Indians, not all just some. They want to become like someone else? Be yourself. Why do you feel inferior? I’ve seen some Indians claiming to be Sycthians, non existent Aryans, and even Arabs. Maybe some of you got mixed with them but why do you want to be like them and at the same time claim to be Hindus or Punjabis or even South Indians? Why are Scythians, Aryans or Arabs superior to you? Persians called themselves Aryans and they are much more lighter than Indians. They look almost White. Even Alexander of Macedonia called them Whiter than the Greeks. Some Indians are just plain confused. The reason for the plain confusion is invasions, false history and even some true history. A message to some idiots….Stop treating very dark skinned Indians like second class and only then you’ll gain the respect of Brahma Shiva or Vishnu. Bollywood or your Germanic history books is not the respresentation of India. Bollywood is a dream. You cannot become White. Without make up, genetically you are darker and will always remain dark and create dark offsprings. Compared to pale White skin, the Indian skin is DARK. The only ones that have white skin are the ones living in Kashmir who are descendents of Tocharians and Kushans who escaped the Mongol onslaught.

    What the hell is this Dravidian race? People who live in South India and parts of India are mixed with Australoids. Weather and thousands of years of genetic change created skin color and features. When you call someone Dalit or inferior you are hating your own kind. You put them in that positon. Why do you do this to your own kind? I am neither a Dalit or Aryan or anything. You can’t put me in a category because I know what I am. I don’t depend upon any human being to define me. I don’t please people who claim to be Aryan or Dravidian. You guys are making a mockery of your own history.

  12. A Question

    I want an answer from Indians not frauds who pretend to be Indians. How come there is so much fraud and corruption in India? Who do you blame the fraud upon? Upon some non-existent Aryans of Central Asia or upon your own?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s