At least here it seems to happen with the clear political agenda. Who needs evolution and democracy anyways other than those inconvenient to the indian government.
The core axiom from which a person builds a belief system can be that contradictions are wrong or that authority (the bible/priest/parent) is right.
This is why conservatives frequently fail to respond to pointing out their contradictions. Their core axiom is one of authority, contradictions have little bearing on their analysis of what is true or not. New information cannot invalidate their already known truth, so what they already "know" twists and molds the new information, rather than their current understanding adapting to the new information.
This makes (real) education directly at odds with conservatism. Inquiry is an anathema to dogma. Conservatism is happy to teach things that are useful which is why you'll hear conservatives extol the virtues of technical education, but doesn't want to teach methods of inquiry or analysis or questioning ones self and ones assumptions, which is why you'll hear conservatism denigrate liberal arts or frequently secular education.
One confusing factor for American conservatives is that the American tradition that is being conserved is a somewhat liberal tradition. So conservatives attach themselves to many (correct) liberal values, but fail to see that they believe those values as the result of their tradition (meaning as a result of authority), and not as the result of a process of rational inquiry.
Put more succinctly: an educated population is a threat to authority and therefore conservatism.
> returning to a previous state of affairs that is perceived as favorable compared to the present
and
> maintaining the status quo
are primarily directed at hierarchy. The exact ideas of any conservative might differ between them (e.g. they might prefer different time periods to "return to", or focus on different areas of society and politics as important right now), but at their core they are directed at building and maintaining strict social/political/economical hierarchies. Often times it's about perceived "natural hierarchies" (e.g. meritocracy in the labor market, or competition in the free market), often times about traditional ones, and sometimes about preventing "unnatural ones", but I honestly can't think of any current or recent conservative legislation (internationally) that doesn't follow this pattern.
Also India has a completely different alignment compared to US-Left/Right and they still struggle from similar issues.
There’s a period of negotiation - figuring out what parts of your colonial history you want to keep, what to change. So many things we assume as “normal” invariably have roots in colonial past. Current systems of Democracy, strict courts of law, scientific education, while great, were introduced by earlier colonial rulers.
Most countries will now spend a few decades fumbling around in internal negotiations to figure out whether they really need 14 years of scientific schooling, democracy, etc.
I understand that it has become common to attribute a number of injustices to heritage from the colonial period, but why education in particular? Why that more than fashion, say, or the institutions of law?
In India's case, the dilemna is that the jobs the citizenry aspires to are only accessible through the current British-origin education system. This current government has made a huge push for Hindi language education, for instance, so much so that it even mandated courses in science and medicine be taught in Hindi, even when there are few good translations or instructors.
The citizenry, of course, finds its own way. Despite all the Hindi push, every city is lined with tuition centers that promise to teach you English, because that's the ticket to a better job.
The negotiation, once again.