It's gonna be a long post folks, sorry for that. But I gotta tell what I gotta tell. And I'll apologize for any inadvertent grammatical mistakes beforehand.
I see what he means. Let's face reality here. India is a disgusting dump compared to Europe.
It happens to every continent at some or other time in their history.
Europe was once considered the centre of the world, but dwindled in power after Roman empire fell from grace.
While in Europe the medieval period was aptly called the dark ages, Asia (especially the Indian subcontinent and China) showed brilliant economical/technological progress during that time.
Many of the technology, which paved the way to late medieval European ascension (including the Renaissance and industrial revolution), was actually imported from these non-European regions...like basic mechanisms of spindle-wheel, gunpowder and basic printing press...Nalanda, Taxila two of the most important oriental learning center were here, with students coming from all over the known world.
Even in the ancient period, Indus Vally civilization had the best sanitation system of the world - the houses there contained the world's earliest known system of flush toilets. These existed in many homes, and were connected to a common sewerage pipe. Most also had private wells.
I'm sure if we had IMDB at that time, you would have written that remark in a completely opposite sense.
It can be frustrating since Indians are plenty smart but many Indians have told me there is no civic sense in India. They only care about themselves and their family but forget the community. Every Euro nation has better traffic and infrastructure than India.
I'm not denying that the current state of India is not up to the mark - only arguing that it's not proper to judge a nation without paying attention to the underlying problems which caused the decline.
I just want some of those super-critical fellows here at IMDB to understand that Indians are not genetically mutated to be born without proper civic/hygienic sense which they seem to believe.
Indians are just like any other human being...life is rough for most people here, they are brought up in a dog-eat-dog environment where most of them are unaware of their basic human rights like proper education, sanitation and food. They have to fight for those rights that the state should have provided them...and they are programmed by the society to be selfish.
In India, due to excessive population - there is a perpetual surplus in the unskilled, and mostly unorganized labour sector, as a result the wages are very low. Can you expect a person to behave in a civil way when he has to support himself and his family on a daily wage of 1.25$ a day? Especially when they see fellow citizens flaunt their wealth in front of them? Economic inequality is hailed as one of the main causes for people to lose trust in each other.
All in all, I'm saying don't single out Indians - rather single out those inherent problems.
By 2020, average Indian's age will be 29, and this young generation, just like Sonny in the movie, understands the need to turn the tide, the necessity to eradicate those pre-existing problems via political/social policy changes, which IS happening here right now! - and is bound to change the nation for the better.
I was shocked to learn that the Netherlands actually has a higher population density than India yet they are 1st world while India is 3rd world. WHY do you think that is?
I am sure if you'd approach anyone with a background in public administration, they would say that higher population density does not make a nation harder to administer - it's the sense of inherent national identity that makes a particular group of people to respect and obey the administration.
This, in its true sense, is rather amiss among majority of Indians. Firstly because India has a mixture of cultures and language - it's like a continent in itself.
Naturally people of one community has reservations against the other which impedes national integrity - moreover, unlike most western countries, we have numerous local political parties who thrive using petty, localized (sometimes even communal and separatist) sentiments.
How can you effectively administer a country if every other development work remain suspended due to warring political parties with opposing agendas? For example, if the government wants to make a train line through somewhere, the opposing party will invariably "oppose" it (like building a religious shrine on the area overnight and use religion as leverage), even if they were the one who actually sanctioned the job (before the regime-change of course)!
So, yes the whole system needs to change, and that will happen - bound to happen, as in physics - all excited systems are bound to stabilize if given proper time to settle...So let's not lose hope in India just now.
Happiness is only Illusion
reply
share
megafauna005
11 years ago
Hey SLV, where in India are you?
To give you an idea of the culture shock of India I refer to Art Bell. You know who Art Bell is right? He hosts that late night radio show about conspiracy theories, UFOs, Bigfoot, etc. He married a Philipino girl and he said Asia is like ANOTHER PLANET!
reply
share
Shantanab-Lone-Voyager
11 years ago
I'm from Kolkata (Calcutta). I don't really understand the Art Bell reference as I am not really familiar with him. Look, I'm alright with positive criticism but I do have problems if one judges India on face-value only and fails to understand the nature of it's problems and empathize.
Perhaps you haven't heard of Jim Corbett. He was a India-born British who lived in mountainous valley of Kumaon in Northern India, primarily known for his hunting exploits, but also revered as a naturalist and philanthropist. He wrote in his book "My India" (which is a remarkable book, if you wish to read it),
In my India, the India I know, there are four hundred million people, ninety percent of whom are simple, honest, brave, loyal, hard-working souls whose daily prayer to God, and to whatever Government is in power, is to give them security of life and property to enable them to enjoy the fruit of their labours. It is of these people, who are admittedly poor, and who are often described as India's starving millions', among whom I have lived and whom I love, that I shall endeavour to tell in these pages of this book, which I humbly dedicate to my friends, the poor of India.
Clearly he was well aware of the ten percent of opportunistic Indians (who still exists today) of his time who were different from the ninety percent-yes, the ninety percent who were simple and honest...and he appreciated their daily struggle and hardship. He used to see Indians as friends and comrades, and freely socialized with them without any reservations.
The same situation still exist, perhaps in a different form - but I'm sure that any outsider, who, like Jim Corbett and anyone who has lived here long enough, tries and sees the beauty and promises of India past it's chaotic exterior...will forgive its shortcomings and appreciate for what it was, is and what it will become.
Happiness is only Illusion
reply
share
eatmorecoffee
11 years ago
I liked Kolkata very much, it's a gentle place for such a big city, but it should employ people in the tourism office who don't mind answering questions about tourism.
India has a number of problems and I can understand completely the struggle to survive by the poor. It's the middle classes and the wealthy I don't get - they have plenty and there is no excuse for some of the boorish behavior I've seen, and the appalling way many of them speak to anyone they consider "lower" than them.
As for the British, I saw a Hindi film about some gangster stuck in a phone booth for a really long time and at the end there was a statement about how corrupt Indian politicians had stolen more from the country than the British ever did. At least the British built a railway. It could have been a lot worse, India could have colonized by Belgium.
reply
share
Shantanab-Lone-Voyager
11 years ago
It's the middle classes and the wealthy I don't get - they have plenty and there is no excuse for some of the boorish behavior I've seen, and the appalling way many of them speak to anyone they consider "lower" than them.
Don't you think this culture was nourished by the colonial British?
Take for example the so called "BABU culture" of Kolkata (as it was the capital then, the whole Nation followed promptly) - it was primarily a generation of semi-educated Bengali Hindus (because Muslims were, at first, reluctant to establish a rapport with British - quite understandable if you consider the fact that it was mainly the Muslims who lost most when British rule was established.)
British saw it as an opportunity and selectively pampered these section of "elite" Hindus - the birth of their favourite "divide-and-rule" tactic, ultimately causing the division of India and Pakistan (east and west).
Now these particular Babus, whose sole aim in life was to grab a clerical job at an English merchant's (or gora sahib, as they used to call them) office, can be hailed as the forefathers of what you called "the middle classes and the wealthy" we now see in India.
The British introduced typical colonial English-education system, which was aimed at producing common clerks and nothing more. And armed by this "English education", this particular section enjoyed more privileges than their counterparts and rose to prominence quickly. They would often sneer at their fellow "uneducated" Indians as they believed they were above them, they were also vocal supporters of British raj and considered armed freedom fighters as terrorists.
As for the British, I saw a Hindi film about some gangster stuck in a phone booth for a really long time and at the end there was a statement about how corrupt Indian politicians had stolen more from the country than the British ever did
I do agree, I believe the Britishers were very good at what they came to do, they were colonists, I don't really blame them for what they did. My only regret is that somehow India is more influenced by the bad aspects of the raj than the good aspects.
Happiness is only Illusion
reply
share
eatmorecoffee
11 years ago
The British were efficient colonialists, yes. They at least left behind some useful infrastructure. Many Indians have said to me (with sadness), they despair for India when the country cannot maintain what the British left behind.
I believe the British fondness for bureaucracy and hierachy had an effect on India, however India had rulers and peasants long before the British came. The wealthy, bad-mannered Indians I encountered are in a class of rudeness of their own. These people have education and should know better. Educated British people do not behave like this.
Having spoken to many hoteliers, everyone I spoke to prefers guests from abroad because they say Indians (ie, the ones with money who can afford to travel) are so rude and demanding. If you are from Kolkata you will know Indians are banned from many hotels and guesthouses around Sudder St. I was appalled by this when I arrived, but after a few months it made sense I could see why.
What are these 'bad aspects of the raj'? Some Indians I met said the country is such a mess they wish the British would come back. I'm not making that up! I think mainly they despair of the corruption. So many want to leave and live elsewhere.
reply
share
velli10501
9 years ago
Thanks for thoughtful response and succinct analysis. I learned something. Yes, "like a continent," and I forget that. You do a fine job of tying the reality of India's political/cultural diversity to problems improving the quality of life there. It is so hard for those of us who have never even visited to begin to imagine India, much less understand any of her issues.
reply
share