Bollywood News, Bollywood Movies, Bollywood Chat

Akshay Kumar Trolled For History Remarks

Created

Last reply

Replies

48

Views

3134

Users

17

Likes

104

Frequent Posters

harun98 thumbnail
Anniversary 11 Thumbnail Group Promotion 2 Thumbnail
Posted: 1 years ago

What was wrong what he said??? 

CrimeMasterToto thumbnail
Visit Streak 90 0 Thumbnail Group Promotion 4 Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 1 years ago

Originally posted by: harun98

What was wrong what he said??? 


2 Things


1. He is clearly doing this for his movie promotion and not out of actual concern for education system or knowledge


2. Various Mughals rulers ruled for around 300 years. Prithviraj Chauhan ruled for 10 years. It is natural for a history book to offer more coverage to mughal rulers simply going by this 

naaznin thumbnail
Visit Streak 500 0 Thumbnail Anniversary 14 Thumbnail + 9
Posted: 1 years ago

Source of history is manuscripts,  writings found on various monuments, biographies, writings by poets of that time. Some of these sources destroyed in wars, earthquakes.

Mughal rulers used to have their autobiography n biographies n had poets in their court who used to write poems in their book from their times, monuments etc. Thats why more is known about them. They were recent that's why less was destroyed.

Like ppl know more details about how Britishers ruled over us

harun98 thumbnail
Anniversary 11 Thumbnail Group Promotion 2 Thumbnail
Posted: 1 years ago
Originally posted by: CrimeMasterToto


2 Things


1. He is clearly doing this for his movie promotion and not out of actual concern for education system or knowledge


2. Various Mughals rulers ruled for around 300 years. Prithviraj Chauhan ruled for 10 years. It is natural for a history book to offer more coverage to mughal rulers simply going by this 


He never denied the mughals impact and rule in India, he was stating that india's own history and historical figures are less talked about and only has few lines for them then outside rulers. Like indian historian wrote much less for them to the point the indian youths don't even know about their own historical rulers. There's nothing wrong in what he said. I live in Britain and even I studied almost everything on british historical figures where only british people know about, it's called british history. In the same way when India talks about history they mostly learn about outside rulers or foreign empires. Its sad that indians only learn about british rule and and mughal rule but don't know much before those rules.

YourCat thumbnail
Posted: 1 years ago

With so many lies spreading in news currently and people not getting work for having a different opinion, imagine how many lies history is filled with.. Crazy world

harun98 thumbnail
Anniversary 11 Thumbnail Group Promotion 2 Thumbnail
Posted: 1 years ago

As a muslim I feel kinda sorry for indian children who only know about foreign rules and glorify it and don't know anything about their own heroes, and akshay being abused for encouraging people to know about their own rulers lol.

MostlyHarmIess thumbnail
Anniversary 10 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 1 years ago

Originally posted by: harun98


He never denied the mughals impact and rule in India, he was stating that india's own history and historical figures are less talked about and only has few lines for them then outside rulers. Like indian historian wrote much less for them to the point the indian youths don't even know about their own historical rulers. There's nothing wrong in what he said. I live in Britain and even I studied almost everything on british historical figures where only british people know about, it's called british history. In the same way when India talks about history they mostly learn about outside rulers or foreign empires. Its sad that indians only learn about british rule and and mughal rule but don't know much before those rules.

Who said they don't? History is taught sequentially. They don't randomly start at Mughal rulers. 


Of course they specifically don't cover Prithviraj in detail. He was a local ruler with a small tenure who is more folk tale than fact. 

NathuPyare thumbnail
Posted: 1 years ago

Originally posted by: Aatishbaz

1. Obviously

2. Various hindu kings ruled for tens of thousands of years in the history of Indian civilization as compared to 300 years of combined mogul rule. However, we have people like you fighting till today for that ugly structure  made by babar, an invader who ruled for only 4 years after destroying an ancient temple in one of the holiest city for hindus. How was babar given more importance than lord ram who was born in ayodhya and his father n forefathers and projenies ruled that place for as long as civilization existed. But for those like you Indian history is all about 2 bit uncivilized invaders who had no place of their own  to call home,who came to only to loot, rape and plunder an ancient and thriving civilization. Pretty shameful that people in today's and age still defend and go gaga over genocidal invaders while undermining Indians who fought and sacrificed their lives for their future generations. But then what to expect from the product of mugal harem ? They will continue to glorify their rapists and murders due to sick n corrupt ideology they are following.

Your points are valid but all that goes to drain because of the personal attacks. 👎🏼

forbidden thumbnail
Anniversary 10 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail
Posted: 1 years ago

this dude is under the knife 🤣 anything he does he gets trolls. Karma *tsk tsk*