Going on 60, still together.. what unites India?

Hyderabadi · Aug 19th, 2007, 20:58

And a message from The Big B:

http://www.indiapoised.com/ad/ad.htm

GauhatiBoy · Aug 19th, 2007, 22:57

One contrast between India and the US: In India, ancient history is all around you, in culture, structures, music etc. whereas here a building 200 years old is considered very old and our culture is comparatively very new. I actually did not really feel this contrast until I visited France, a very old country, when I was old enough to appreciate that. In India the contrast is more.

What I'm getting at, is that with all the ancient history around you, it would be a bit incredulous to say that you're not a part of it, not a part of India or Assam or whatever, hence a strong feeling of belonging. Just my 2 cents, or nonsense, whatever it is

Dilliwala · Aug 20th, 2007, 05:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by dzibead

What keeps India together?

Why, A.R. Rahman, of course! (with help from with help from Bankim Chandra Chatterjee and Rabindranath Tagore)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BJ399KOoNRA

http://youtube.com/watch?v=MRPpSgRqtRc

Hey, thanks! This is the very first time I've seen the Revival version.
And the girl doing the sign language - wow! I mean WOW! Isn't she BEAUTIFUL?

Thanks again.

invidious · Aug 20th, 2007, 15:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackbird

I feel that westerners can find it very hard to understand the whole point about being Indian and what that means to the majority of the population of India. I'm not saying I understand it either, but here are my thoughts.

In a sense Indianness is merely an extension of the bonds of family, caste, community, religion, language etc... Belonging to India is the largest arena in which these cultural bonds operate. As a gross generalisation, we don't have such bonds in western cultures, or at least not to even a fraction of the extent to which they prevail in India.

Also the whole concept is problematical for westerners of a liberal or leftwing persuasion... in these circles patriotism is a dirty word, and through this mindset it is even possible to consider someone who says something like "Indians are highly patriotic" as racist.... but for me, to say such a thing is hardly a criticism, because patriotism doesn't have to mean the strong trampling on the weak -- just because that's what we do with it, doesn't mean that Indian patriotism means the same thing. As has often been pointed out, India has never invaded another country.

One book which really furthered my understanding is Being Indian by Pavan Varma, there's a good review of it here: http://www.boloji.com/bookreviews/051.htm

Being Indian cannot be equated simply with western notions of patriotism.... it goes much deeper than that. I feel that maybe some of the posters in this thread are desperate to downplay the importance of the shared sense of Indianness, because it makes them feel uncomfortable and may not be politically correct according to our cultural values, which ultimately can be as blinkered as anyone else's.

I consider my self a fairly left wing cynical and am quite patriotic as an Indian. A distinction needs to be made between patriotism and jingoism. What I found during my stay in the US was that a lot of them think they are patriotic when they are merely jingoistic. They will parrot the lines of the government till some scandal comes forward. I once saw a Taco Bell with 12 American flags on top of it. I don't find that patriotic, I find it jingoistic.

I don't identify as strongly with my region or religion as I do with my country. The fact that I am from a certain part of India and subscribe to a certain religion is quite secondary; almost irrelevant to me.

blackbird · Aug 20th, 2007, 16:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by invidious

I consider my self a fairly left wing cynical and am quite patriotic as an Indian. A distinction needs to be made between patriotism and jingoism. What I found during my stay in the US was that a lot of them think they are patriotic when they are merely jingoistic. They will parrot the lines of the government till some scandal comes forward.

That's an important distinction you've made there. I think in most people's minds in Britain, there is no distinction between patriotism and jingoism -- if you are patriotic about your country, you must believe we are superior to the rest of the world. This is because for several hundred years as a nation we did believe we were superior (and I'm ashamed to say substantial minority of people still do

). So I guess now we are living in a time of backlash against that.

The US's history is different but there seems to be this whole thing there about how if you don't back your president wholeheartedly whatever he does, you are Un-American (the 50s McCarthy era being the clearest example, but the tradition lives on). So the liberals have to keep insisting that they are proud to be American, to counter the argument that dissent automatically disqualifies them from being true Americans.

In both cases I think we have a problem with patriotism as something that is manipulated in the population by the rulers of the nation over hundreds of years. US governments had to invent and instil patriotism in the new nation, hence the need to get schoolchildren to salute the flag, etc. UK governments similarly had to invent Britishness to override the nationalism of the various nations of the British Isles. Indian governments have had no need for such invention of national identity.

Quote:

I once saw a Taco Bell with 12 American flags on top of it.

I think it's a rating system, the more US flags, the worse the food.

invidious · Aug 20th, 2007, 20:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackbird

That's an important distinction you've made there. I think in most people's minds in Britain, there is no distinction between patriotism and jingoism -- if you are patriotic about your country, you must believe we are superior to the rest of the world. This is because for several hundred years as a nation we did believe we were superior (and I'm ashamed to say substantial minority of people still do

). So I guess now we are living in a time of backlash against that.

The US's history is different but there seems to be this whole thing there about how if you don't back your president wholeheartedly whatever he does, you are Un-American (the 50s McCarthy era being the clearest example, but the tradition lives on). So the liberals have to keep insisting that they are proud to be American, to counter the argument that dissent automatically disqualifies them from being true Americans.

In both cases I think we have a problem with patriotism as something that is manipulated in the population by the rulers of the nation over hundreds of years. US governments had to invent and instil patriotism in the new nation, hence the need to get schoolchildren to salute the flag, etc. UK governments similarly had to invent Britishness to override the nationalism of the various nations of the British Isles. Indian governments have had no need for such invention of national identity.

I think it's a rating system, the more US flags, the worse the food.

It's quite the opposite in India. I remember as a kid growing up in India, there was a massive colonial hangover. You never saw Indian cricketers ever sledging, unlike say the Aussies or the English - even the Pakistanis. For a long time, it was drilled into us that we are a country with a glorious past but the present situation is quite screwed. Unfortunately, this mentality exists to a certain extent to this day of Indians being inferior in some way. I do have a big beef with the British government - they never apologized for the Amritsar massacre, or the man-made genocide in Bengal in 1943. And I am pretty annoyed at successive Indian governments for not pursuing the matter further. I've spoken to many Brits and Europeans who assume that India should be thankful for the British rule - often citing the example of railways. It's quite sad really.

Nick-H · Aug 20th, 2007, 20:46

Quote:

I've spoken to many Brits and Europeans who assume that India should be thankful for the British rule - often citing the example of railways. It's quite sad really.

More than sad, that's bad.

But I'm surprised because many of us are not very proud of our colonial past.

What really shocked me was reading that Indian school kids these days get to think that the East India Company was a good thing for India!

But I don't go in for all this apologising by people who weren't even born at the time. How can someone apologise for something they didn't do. An expression of regret might be nice, though, yes.

blackbird · Aug 20th, 2007, 21:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick-H

Quote:

I've spoken to many Brits and Europeans who assume that India should be thankful for the British rule - often citing the example of railways. It's quite sad really.

More than sad, that's bad.

But I'm surprised because many of us are not very proud of our colonial past.

I'm surprised too -- I haven't met many (if any) people who say that. A lot of people may think that the Raj was a good thing for India -- that's not the same as thinking Indians should be grateful for colonial oppression....

Quote:

But I don't go in for all this apologising by people who weren't even born at the time. How can someone apologise for something they didn't do. An expression of regret might be nice, though, yes.

I agree, I'm not going to apologise for all the bad things my nation has done -- it wasn't even my people, it was the ruling classes. Moreover, an apology is just fine words -- there are plenty of fine words in the world and not enough right action.

Given that our government is so fond of fine words, it's not so much that they wouldn't like to apologise as such, more that by admitting wrongdoing publicly they would be opening themselves up to millions of lawsuits by the families of victims of all the massacres and atrocities of the last few hundred years....

shashank.aggarwal · Aug 20th, 2007, 23:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyderabadi

And a message from The Big B:

http://www.indiapoised.com/ad/ad.htm

They are words of Javed Akhtar, and I am sure that they will be be remembered for some time !!

shashank.aggarwal · Aug 20th, 2007, 23:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by invidious

I've spoken to many Brits and Europeans who assume that India should be thankful for the British rule - often citing the example of railways. It's quite sad really.

I have heard this from Indian's as well. When people used to talk about the sorry state of affairs here they often used to say that we were much better in the Raj days...

I am not sure what makes them think if Raj was not there we wouldn't have our own railways..and the most important part..to an extent I agree that they did give us some good things..but the big question is at what cost ? If they gave us railway can someone even calculate how much was taken from us ?

capt_mahajan · Aug 20th, 2007, 23:46

It doesn't gall me that the British government never expressed regret, because no Western colonising power has done so. Expectations of regret have been reserved for the Germans and the Japanese, because history and double standards are written by the victors. And reconciliation commissions seem to be restricted to civil wars.

It doesnt even gall me when Indians praise the Raj. The same Indians praise Churchill as a great leader fighting for justice, not knowing that at the same period of time, two years before India's independence, he was making absolutely racist remarks about Indians. Ignorance is sometimes bliss, usually oblivion.

What galls me is this:
In 1997, almost 80 years after the Jalianwala Bagh massacre, Prince Philip was shown a plaque in Amritsar, saying 2000 people had been killed.
His reaction: "That's not right. The number is less".

That was indecent.

shashank.aggarwal · Aug 20th, 2007, 23:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilliwala

Hey, thanks! This is the very first time I've seen the Revival version.
And the girl doing the sign language - wow! I mean WOW! Isn't she BEAUTIFUL?

Thanks again.

Bit off topic for this thread...

Even I saw it for the first time..but even though the girl was good looking,

but it makes me wonder with all those tribes and landscapes, how many lives would it take for an 'average' person so see entire India...

If I say that its virtually impossible in a life span, then I might not be exaggerating..the best one can do is a touchdown in all states or better still known cities and destinations...

blackbird · Aug 20th, 2007, 23:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by capt_mahajan

What galls me is this:
In 1997, almost 80 years after the Jalianwala Bagh massacre, Prince Philip was shown a plaque in Amritsar, saying 2000 people had been killed.
His reaction: "That's not right. The number is less".

That was indecent.

That man should never have been allowed a passport. He has caused offence all over the world. A few examples:

To a British student in China: "If you stay here much longer, you will go home with slitty eyes."
To a British student in Papua New Guinea: "You managed not to get eaten then?"
To a British tourist in Hungary: "You can't have been here that long — you haven't got a pot belly."
To a Scottish driving instructor: "How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough to pass the test?"
To Australian Aborigines: "Do you still throw spears at each other?"
Buckingham Palace officially apologized in November 2000, after the prince toured a Scottish factory. While looking at electrical equipment, the prince said its crude appearance seemed as if it was "installed by an Indian."

capt_mahajan · Aug 21st, 2007, 00:07

IMHO, just coz he's a buffoon does not excuse insensitivity. He is not Benny Hill, unless I missed something

PS Though he's quite funny, judging from blackbird's post

shashank.aggarwal · Aug 21st, 2007, 00:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by capt_mahajan

PS Though he's quite funny, judging from blackbird's post

OR maybe he tries too hard to be funny ...

View Poll Results: What keeps India united?
Shared sense of identity	32	45.07%
Extreme form of democracy	11	15.49%
Secular tradition with religious freedom	26	36.62%
The Indian ruling elite	8	11.27%
Or just the sheer differences	17	23.94%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 71. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Aug 19th, 2007, 20:58	#106
Hyderabadi Maha Guru Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: GA,USA. Posts: 1,121	And a message from The Big B: http://www.indiapoised.com/ad/ad.htm

Aug 19th, 2007, 22:57	#107
GauhatiBoy Not sure where I'm from Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Oregon USA Posts: 281	One contrast between India and the US: In India, ancient history is all around you, in culture, structures, music etc. whereas here a building 200 years old is considered very old and our culture is comparatively very new. I actually did not really feel this contrast until I visited France, a very old country, when I was old enough to appreciate that. In India the contrast is more. What I'm getting at, is that with all the ancient history around you, it would be a bit incredulous to say that you're not a part of it, not a part of India or Assam or whatever, hence a strong feeling of belonging. Just my 2 cents, or nonsense, whatever it is

Aug 20th, 2007, 23:46	#116
capt_mahajan (in charge of navel affairs) Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: India Posts: 10,538	It doesn't gall me that the British government never expressed regret, because no Western colonising power has done so. Expectations of regret have been reserved for the Germans and the Japanese, because history and double standards are written by the victors. And reconciliation commissions seem to be restricted to civil wars. It doesnt even gall me when Indians praise the Raj. The same Indians praise Churchill as a great leader fighting for justice, not knowing that at the same period of time, two years before India's independence, he was making absolutely racist remarks about Indians. Ignorance is sometimes bliss, usually oblivion. What galls me is this: In 1997, almost 80 years after the Jalianwala Bagh massacre, Prince Philip was shown a plaque in Amritsar, saying 2000 people had been killed. His reaction: "That's not right. The number is less". That was indecent.

Aug 21st, 2007, 00:07	#119
capt_mahajan (in charge of navel affairs) Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: India Posts: 10,538	IMHO, just coz he's a buffoon does not excuse insensitivity. He is not Benny Hill, unless I missed something PS Though he's quite funny, judging from blackbird's post

User Name		Remember Me?
Password