Abstract
I employ two texts to illustrate the manner in which Indian history has been used, and abused, to evaluate inequality, both as a norm and as fact. The first, is the pivotal role played by James Mill's History in abusing the fact of caste divisions. The second, is Sen's revisionist, and ultimately misleading use in The Argumentative Indian of a normative lens of equality - to filter out the constitutive role of caste in Indian history and culture. Mill's highly prejudicial and uninformed views on caste and economic progress have been uncritically adopted by Sen and other liberal scholars, with illiberal consequence for the Indian economy and polity.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
