Re: [tied] Re: Misra, Bryant and Indigenous-Nationalist Conflation

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 12913
Date: 2002-03-28

Dear Vishal,
 
I said I felt very sorry about the JIES business. Not that I can do much about it personally, but it's good if people are aware of such shady liaisons, so I have sent my warnings to a few colleagues. I won't do more, since far from being a pro-Nazi type I am not a fanatical Nazi-hunter either. Fortunately, it's easy to see that the "blood money" has not been used to convert the JIES into a mouthpiece of Nazi sympathisers (or can you prove that it has?). "Our stalwarts" don't get any of the the money anyway. The JIES people don't pay linguists to write for the journal.
 
Given the crucial importance of Hittite, Iranian and Indo-Aryan in mainstream IE studies I find it surprising that you should call them Eurocentric. On the other hand, given the geographical density of the family, accusations of "Eurocentrism" sound like accusing Romanists of a Mediterranean bias.
 
Prof. Misra's idée fixe is too obvious to be an illusion, and it doesn't take a white supremacist to see that his linguistics is thoroughly unsound and unprofessional (white supremacists, with the possible exception of Pearson, have no deep interest in linguistics anyway, judging from their excesses on this list some time ago, and please note that we showed them the door on that occasion). Did I really "hurl abuse" at Misra? I merely suggested, in an aside, that his disavowal of ideological commitment might not be quite sincere. There must be a psychological reason behind such consistent self-delusion and his refusal to consider (let alone accept and accommodate) _any_ evidence that disagrees with his views, even such as has been common knowledge for 130 years.
 
I have not attempted to discredit Misra views indirectly through an ad hominem attack, or by attributing a false consciousness to him. Quite the contary, I have on several occasions laid out my purely technical objections to historical linguistics as rewritten by Misra. I don't have to psychoanalyse him to prove my point. For all I care he could be a hardline Indocentric nationalist, or whatever, and I wouldn't mention the fact or give a damn about it if it didn't matter professionally. Also, I couldn't care less what colour or hue anyone's skin is -- white, brown or turquoise. My eyes happen to be dark brown and my hair is black, if it matters to you -- but I hope it doesn't, really. It's Misra's linguistics, not his skin or hidden prejudices (if any) that I object to; and the reason why I object to it is that it is very bad science -- something that places Misra on the fringe. I would prefer to ignore Misra altogether if his ideas were not circulated here at regular intervals and if he were not cited as an exemplary Indian linguist -- an honour he certainly does not deserve (alas for Indian linguistics if he did).
 
Yours,
 
Piotr
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: vishalsagarwal
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 9:56 PM
Subject: [tied] Re: Misra, Bryant and Indigenous-Nationalist Conflation

VA: And what motive causes you to stick to what I think are Eurocentric theories? White Suopermacism? Why does IE studies still rely on Anti-Jewish racists, why is their premier journal published by a person who is accused of being a follower of a Nazi like ideology?

How easy it is for people like Piotr and their European/N-American white colleagues to hurl abuses at others, when their own stalwarts take blood money to publish their papers in JIES EVEN TODAY.

Before accusing others with brown skins, look into your own mindest.

A more charitable explanation of Mishra's viewpoint could have been that he is deluding himself.
 
[from another posting:]
 
... The post by Piotr on S S Mishra clearly brings out his hidden prejudices and proves once again that respectable scholars of IE studies are quite dishonorable in treating people who do not have white skins (and perhaps blonde hair and blue eyes).