Why Indians Are Corrupt - a Rebuttal
Why Indians Are Corrupt : a Rebuttal
Title & Text of the Original Article
Why Indians are corrupt? What’s wrong with their attitude?
Points raised in the original articles are numbered below and their rebuttal is available under them.
Date of Response: 27-Mar-2019
When some truth is mixed with opinion and fed by a lazy, irrational mind then the output cannot be any less confusing work as this original article can be. I was shocked when I read how the false presented as truth and then concluded as a negative image based on that. I fail to understand what purpose this article serves the author.
Introducton
-
Indians are Hobbesian: ( having a Culture of self-interest)
-
It is the height of generalization. Do you have any survey results on this? Who was surveyed? who participated? Can you please share the data?
-
What do you mean by culture? Are you referring to recent society or you are referring to Indian genes?
-
When you say Indian, are you referring to Hindus, or you are including Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Christians, Jews, Parasis, and Muslims as well?
-
If you are referring to only Hindus it mean other Indians are not Hobbesian?
-
If you are referring to all then why other Indian religions are Hobbesian? They do not have temples and gods.
-
Why did you choose the word “Self Interest” for Indian culture? Is this word absolutely bad?
-
What is wrong with being “self-interest”
-
-
Corruption in India is a cultural aspect. Indians seem to think nothing peculiar about corruption. It is prevalent.
- How can you conclude that “corruption is a cultural aspect”. Can you share some (if possible around 5-10 consistent observation) concrete examples of Indian Tradition or Hindu Tradition which helped you in concluding this?
-
Indians tolerate corrupt individuals rather than correct them. No race can be congenitally corrupt.
-
You mean every corrupt person boldly accepts he is corrupt, people know he is corrupt and we tolerate them? Show any example? If our judiciary is slow because of some n number of reasons does it mean we tolerate the corrupt?
-
What do you think is democracy? Should a person not be allowed to defend himself with whatever means he has? If court cases take a long time then how society is responsible for this?
-
Our police and judicial system is part of our government which we inherited from the British raj. The way they were created, run and managed new government continued that even after post Independence. Why blame the common Indian person? Do you mean the Indian Government is Indian Culture/ Hindu Culture?
-
To know why Indians are corrupt, look at their patterns and practices.
-
Firstly
-
Religion is transactional in India.
-
Indians give God cash and anticipate an out-of-turn reward.
Response-1. I think you are saying “Indian” means “Hindu”. What do you mean by “God”. Do you even understand Hindu culture does not have a concept of God? It is a western term. We have Devi and Devta. For Hindu Devi and Devta is Yantra (tool/ machine). Every sensible person need tool in his life to perform better, we take care of our tools, what is wrong in that? If you pay your car mechanic Rs 5000 to service your car is it a bribe? Is it an out-of-turn reward?
Response-2. Do you think Indians are so fooled that they think God is dumb and an idiot who can fooled by giving Rs 10?
Response-3. If I give Rs 10 in temple why do you think, I am giving it for my favor and not for taking care of temple priest so that they can take care of my tool (Yantra) in the temple?
-
Such a plea acknowledges that favors are needed for the undeserving.
Response-1. When we do not have a concept of God and only the concept of “Devi”, “Devta” and “Yantra” then why do you think giving money to a mechanic of the “Yantra” is to take favor of Machine. Ultimately it is my life, how and where I use that tool, and whether that will work or not it is business between my capability and power of the tool. Where is a question of “undeserving”. Have you not heard that “Yantra” power can fire back to you if you want to misuse it?
-
In the world outside the temple walls, such a transaction is named “bribe”.
Response-1. As per you money giving to take favor is a bribe?
Response-2. Money collection in the name of service is a bribe or not?
Response-3. Whether the non-Hindu religion collects money or not? What do you call that transaction?
Response-4. Why do you think that transaction is better than giving to temple?
Response-5. Do you know earlier times temples, Dharamsala and Gurukula were created maintained by the kings and wealthy people?
Response-6. Do you know “Madras Regulation VII of 1817” was created by the British to take control of the rich temple in the south?
Response-7. Do you know earlier times temples were the center of Dance, cultural activities, festivals? They sponsored education, shelter, food, and medicines for all. If you go to some village you will find the reminiscence there even today.
Response-8. Do you know in Indian culture collecting money for education, food, health, and shelter was considered a sin (Papam)? It was free because temples were maintaining those for all.
-
A wealthy Indian gives not cash to temples, but gold crowns and such baubles.
Response-1. Do you know how much gold and silver Indian temples have?
Response-2. Do you know how much cash Indian temples have?
Response-3. Do you think in other cultures rich people are giving money to churches and mosques? That too without expecting anything from them?
Response-4. What is this concept of CSR? Rich people created their NGO and doing CSR program to earn more reputation and money so that more reputation and business can be earned?
Response-5. Do you know any non-Indian rich man giving money to their NGO or religious organization for the service of humanity? All money directly or indirectly for conversion, service to humanity is hogwash and showy.
-
His gifts can not feed the poor. His pay-off is for God. He thinks it will be wasted if it goes to a needy man.
Response-1. Why did you conclude that a Hindu thinks that money given to the needy is waste? This is your own skewed perspective about reality. Post Independence Temples are in the control of the Government how can temple decide what to do with the money and what not? Why are you blaming temples for this? Government is 100% responsible for this.
-
In June 2009, The Hindu published a report of Karnataka minister G. Janardhan Reddy gifting a crown of gold and diamonds worth Rs 45 crore to Tirupati.
Response-1. This guy is from BJP and reported by NDTV and 2009 was election year. Now you can connect all the dots. These kinds of events keep happening sometimes people will give cash, other times gold what is your problem? You are contradicting yourself from your point 9 (“bold crowns and such baubles”). Gold is also a wealth of temples. That can be pledged with the government and you can earn interest on that. And it is inflation-free assets.
-
India’s temples collect so much that they don’t know what to do with it. Billions are gathering dust in temple vaults.
Response-1. Don’t you know temples are in government control and the government decides what to do with the money? Temple cannot take the call. What is the basis of this argument?
-
When Europeans came to India they built schools. When Indians go to Europe & the USA, they build temples.
Response-1. Why do you think schools and hospitals are more important than temples?
Response-2. What makes you think that after having a presence with temples Indians do not start schools?
Response-3. Why Indian goes to the west? Because they think infrastructure is much better there in terms of schools, roads, and hospitals then why build that which is in ample amount. Instead, build something through which you can connect to your own people.
Response-4. Do you know how many churches and mosques are created by Westerners in the south of India and Kashmir? Without data, your argument is nonsensible.
-
Indians believe that if God accepts money for his favors, then nothing is wrong in doing the same thing. This is why Indians are so easily corruptible.
Response-1. What makes you think that “Indians believe this way”. I mentioned earlier, we don’t believe in God. We believe in Devi and Yantra. Yantra is a subjective tool for us. We talk to that, live with that like it is another family member. We know our karma will go with us. No family member can save us from our own bad karma, no matter how powerful that Devi is. We have to bear the fruit of our own karma.
-
Indian culture accommodates such transaction
-
First: Morally. There is no real stigma. An utterly corrupt politician can make a comeback, just unthinkable in the West.
Response-1. In the west Judicial system is fast because of the low population and higher currency exchange rate. We don’t have that many resources, money, and infrastructure. So, a so-called corrupt will die but will not get punished in the court. But, for this why are you blaming society and culture?
Secondly
-
Indian moral ambiguity towards corruption is visible in its history. Indian history tells of the capture of cities and kingdoms after guards were paid off to open the gates, and commanders paid off to surrender. This is unique to India.
Response-1. Is it only in India? It didn’t happen anywhere else? Any data for this?
Response-2. If someone wants to subvert the power because of X reasons then there are 4 ways, and they go in this order. 1- Convince the existing to leave so that you can come, 2- pay him or someone else to throw him away, 3- Fight with him, punish him, kill him 4- Place your spy and break the loyalty of people. What is wrong with this approach? Why do you think fighting and bloodbath should be the first option for subverting?
- Do you mean fighting, killing, the bloodbath is better than paying money and convincing them to leave or ditch?
-
Indians’ corrupt nature has meant limited warfare on the subcontinent.
Response-1. Hindus are the oldest living civilization. We are proud of it. What other civilization gained after fighting, they are finished. Out of 25 old civilizations like Egyptian, Roman, Mayan, Greek, etc, we are the only surviving civilization. Why you attribute this survival to corruption?
-
It is striking how little Indians have actually fought compared to ancient Greece and modern Europe.
Response-1. If this is true, what is wrong with this?
Response-2. Have you read Indian history and the kind of fight that happened here? The biggest civil war on this planet happened is the Kurushetra war. After that, we learned that avoid war as much as possible. You mean, it is wrong learning?
-
The Turk’s battles with Nadir Shah were vicious and fought to the finish.
Response-1. What is your point? Many fights in India and outside happened like this.
-
In India fighting wasn’t needed, bribing was enough to see off armies.
Response-1. Your argument is based on your whole limited data points and skewed perception.
-
Any invader willing to spend cash could brush aside India’s kings, no matter how many tens of thousands of soldiers were in their infantry.
Response-1. In general, we have been a peace-loving civilization and we paid the price for that. Why do you want to name this peace gesture as a gesture of corruption? It is like saying Mahatama Gandhi was corrupt because he wanted to have a peaceful settlement with the British. Do you think, British left unconditionally? Some give and take happened and without many bloodbaths or civil war or military war with Indians they left. Was it wrong?
-
Little resistance was given by the Indians at the “Battle” of Plassey. Clive paid off Mir Jaffar and all of Bengal folded to an army of 3,000.
Response-1. Yes true. Exceptions are always there. Why don’t you pick Shivaji Maharaj, Prithiviraj Chouhan, Rani Laxmi Bai etc?
-
There was always a financial exchange for taking Indian forts. Golconda was captured in 1687 after the secret back door was left open.
Response-1. I mentioned earlier there 4 strategies to subvert the existing power. Money is one and least costly. You look advocate of war.
-
Mughals vanquished Marathas and Rajputs with nothing but bribes.
Response-1. Yes. The same logic explains above.
-
The Raja of Srinagar gave up Dara Shikoh’s son Sulaiman to Aurangzeb after receiving a bribe.
Response-1. Yes. The same logic explains above.
-
There are many cases where Indians participated on a large scale in treason due to bribery.
Response-1. If you have made your mood to stereotype some culture then you can assemble any kind of facts to establish what is in your mind. Indian people in general are honest and hardworking. Compare to other cultures they are cannot be corrupted even after a lot of poverty. In other parts of the world, people are much well off but you cannot guarantee that they cannot be bought.
-
The question is: Why Indians have a transactional culture while other ‘civilized’ nations don’t?
Response-1. This is a nonsense question. You have a wrong hypothesis it need not be proved or disproved.
Thirdly
-
Indians do not believe in the theory that they all can rise if each of them behaves morally, because that is not the message of their faith.
Response-1. What makes you think so? I hope you are referring to Hindu, not Indians. The message of Hindu faith is your Karma your doing. Nobody can save you. You have to reap your own karma.
-
Their caste system separates them.
Response-1. The caste system was not for separation. When mass-based standard education system was not there that time Caste was a tool for skill & knowledge management from one generation to another. Today when medical and engineering colleges are in ample amount there is no need for this caste system. It will go slowly.
-
They don’t believe that all men are equal.
Response-1. What makes you think so. We believe all men and even women are equal. Have you read PurushShukta from Rigveda 10.90?
-
This resulted in their division and migration to other religions.
Response-1. This is not because of the original caste system. This problem happened because of the caste system created by [H H Risley](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Hope_Risley). Secondly in the last 30 years, we have come with so many engineering and medical colleges and we continued our old caste system. It is just a matter of time. It will definitely go away.
-
Many Hindus started their own faith like Sikh, Jain, Buddha and many converted to Christianity and Islam.
Response-1. So, what. Even if you don’t’ believe in anything you can be Hindu. Charvak is also Hindu. I can believe in Jesus Christ and I can be Hindu. What is wrong? The Hindu system is like an open architecture, it is a strength of the Hindu system. Why do you see this as wrong?
-
The result is that Indians don’t trust one another.
Response-1. What is your data point? It may be your personal emotional experience. Don’t generalize this type of personal emotional experiences in the name of Indian culture.
-
There are no Indians in India, there are Hindus, Christians, Muslims, and whatnot.
Response-1. Most absurd argument. It is like there is no father and son in the home only a husband. A person can have multiple identities at the same time. Based on the need for role changes. Having an Indian passport or Adhar card means you are Indian. Yes, there are different faiths, and because secular state all have their own way of living and worshiping. What is the problem? We have our individual identities based on our faith, language, region, tradition but it doesn’t mean that there is no Indian here.
-
Indians forget that 1400 years ago they all belonged to one faith.
Response-1. Society still remembers this. That is why you see the conflicts around. Our history books are wrongly written by the government and leftist. So why to blame Indian culture for that.
-
This division evolved into an unhealthy culture. The inequality has resulted in a corrupt society, in India, everyone is thus against everyone else, except God and even he must be bribed.
Response-1. You looks have very much negative feeling for Indian culture and faiths of India. You overlapped our government problem, British legacy, poverty forced upon us and project as our culture. If you want to learn Indian culture then you need to think with an open mind. Interact with less educated, poor, or lower middle-class people. English educated person living in the metro represents western culture more and Indian culture less.
Finally those cultures, societies, and governments like Switzerland, New Zealand, USA, etc which put Indian culture in a bad light and think Indians are corrupt, why they allow corrupt Indians to live in their country and take deposit of their money in their country? Are you any less party in corruption? If any Indian is corrupt in your country then it is because you have a tax haven for them. Just because you are a more wealthy nation you do not have the authority and the right to tag Indian culture as a corrupt culture!
Original Article
This I received on my Whatsapp
Start of Message
Why Indians r corrupt? What’s wrong with their attitude?
A very Hard-hitting article from New Zealand. It’s a New Zealander’s view on corruption in India
Indians are Hobbesian: ( having a Culture of self-interest)
Corruption in India is a cultural aspect. Indians seem to think nothing peculiar about corruption. It is prevalent.
Indians tolerate corrupt individuals rather than correct them. No race can be congenitally corrupt.
To know why Indians are corrupt, look at their patterns and practices.
Firstly:
Religion is transactional in India.
Indians give God cash and anticipate an out-of-turn reward.
Such a plea acknowledges that favors are needed for the undeserving.
In the world outside the temple walls, such a transaction is named “bribe”.
A wealthy Indian gives not cash to temples, but gold crowns and such baubles.
His gifts can not feed the poor. His pay-off is for God. He thinks it will be wasted if it goes to a needy man.
In June 2009, The Hindu published a report of Karnataka minister G. Janardhan Reddy gifting a crown of gold and diamonds worth Rs 45 crore to Tirupati.
India’s temples collect so much that they don’t know what to do with it. Billions are gathering dust in temple vaults.
When Europeans came to India they built schools. When Indians go to Europe & USA, they build temples.
Indians believe that if God accepts money for his favours, then nothing is wrong in doing the same thing. This is why Indians are so easily corruptible.
Indian culture accommodates such transaction
First: Morally. There is no real stigma. An utterly corrupt politician can make a comeback, just unthinkable in the West.
Secondly:
Indian moral ambiguity towards corruption is visible in its history. Indian history tells of the capture of cities and kingdoms after guards were paid off to open the gates, and commanders paid off to surrender.
This is unique to India.
Indians’ corrupt nature has meant limited warfare on the subcontinent.
It is striking how little Indians have actually fought compared to ancient Greece and modern Europe.
The Turk’s battles with Nadir Shah were vicious and fought to the finish.
In India fighting wasn’t needed, bribing was enough to see off armies.
Any invader willing to spend cash could brush aside India’s kings, no matter how many tens of thousands of soldiers were in their infantry.
Little resistance was given by the Indians at the “Battle” of Plassey.
Clive paid off Mir Jaffar and all of Bengal folded to an army of 3,000.
There was always a financial exchange to taking Indian forts. Golconda was captured in 1687 after the secret back door was left open.
Mughals vanquished Marathas and Rajputs with nothing but bribes.
The Raja of Srinagar gave up Dara Shikoh’s son Sulaiman to Aurangzeb after receiving a bribe.
There are many cases where Indians participated on a large scale in treason due to bribery.
Question is: Why Indians have a transactional culture while other ‘civilized’ nations don’t?
Thirdly:
Indians do not believe in the theory that they all can rise if each of them behaves morally, because that is not the message of their faith.
Their caste system separates them.
They don’t believe that all men are equal.
This resulted in their division and migration to other religions.
Many Hindus started their own faith like Sikh, Jain, Buddha and many converted to Christianity and Islam.
The result is that Indians don’t trust one another.
There are no Indians in India, there are Hindus, Christians, Muslims and what not.
Indians forget that 1400 years ago they all belonged to one faith.
This division evolved an unhealthy culture. The inequality has resulted in a corrupt society, in India every one is thus against everyone else, except God and even he must be bribed.
End of Message