Raise Your Voice

I have visited Malaysia in 2004, a year before my US visit. Malaysian "development" and people's attitude there have also provoked me for comparisions. But the contrast and comparision did not make me threatened. It was like an academic probe. Whereas the US and its "wealth" do not allow me to have "cool" insights. US,is not any other country, it cannot be called a "peer" country. The heirarchy makes us feel inferior. I give two example. I am very much impressed by the US systems care for children. How school buses are given priority on roads and how school zones are conserved from traffic hazards, it is all great. We have witnessed many tragedies involving school children recently. I wish my country too have such sensitivity towards children's lives. But, I am aware that the same US, which cares for its children very much, did bomb school building in iraq and suffered millions of children with its economic sanctions. Another example, one of my friends there in US, expresed his objection for engaging drivers in INdia. It is outragious to keep a person waiting idly for hours together, he argued. I said okay, but what about thousands of people who are working overnight ( in call centres and medical transcription centres) serving bosses overseas? is it not outragious?
 

I think the infrastructure, economy, values, etc are so different, that comparisons end up making us feel inferior or superior.

There is value in comparing other developing countries in seeing what India has done better, but ultimately, it comes down to making us feel better about ourselves - wouldn't you think?

So is it ok to say that due to the stage of development we are better off than many African countries but are still lagging behind China? Is that something that raises national pride?

Shouldn't we be concerned about improving life for ourselves instead of comparing that our roads are better than country x's roads? Or that our health care is better than country y's, even though millions of Indians don't have any access to it?

The human psyche makes comparisons inevitable - our minds needs to slot things, stereotype things, in order to make sense of our surroundings and the world, but when it provides an empty sense of identity, or a convenient pit for people to fall into, it's time to question our beliefs...
 

The very concept of "development" is questionable. isn't it? We think we are developed now than a century ago, but we are not able to avail fresh water, fresh air, natural housing- which were freely available then.
The notion of "development" is a tricky one. A friend who accompanied me last 10 days in Washington DC was repeatedly saying that americans are scared of each other. and of course, they are scared of the entire world.
When it comes the real "good life", these all count. are you blessed with free air? are you framed in a routine that is inclusive of both exercise and working? are you getting the natural food that is really natural? are you having a real sense of security?
In a country where millions of cars commute on roads, a geopositional system or an aerial monitoring or detailed suggestions that appear on express highways may sound great, but the question remains- why so many cars?
 

I agree - there is no true definition to words like progress, development, sanity, etc. I think what you are getting at though is the extreme of individualism that has its grips on the US as an ideology.

My explanation for this is for you to imagine people, each in their own bubbles, choosing to admit few into their bubbles, but keeping most others out. It's a choice, a lifestyle and an attitude. But can we say it is wrong?

Can we as Indians say that people here have to be like people in India - inquisitive family and neighbors, no real privacy, etc. It still comes back to the main issue of why comparisons don't work.

I appreciate your comments!
 

When I landed back in Hyderabad on Nov 8-9 (intervening night), it was quite embarassing to me. We had to get down from the lufthansa flight into the runway and had to take stairs to go to the "passport/visa stamping" room. There were long queues and two or three counters were working in a slow pace. After 9 hours tedious flight, it was really unbearable. One of the american passengers commented " it's pathetic" and I felt bad for such a state of affairs. but, why should do the comparision? why should I enter into such situation that warrants comparisions? I am supposed to worry more about our railway stations, busstations and places that do not have real transportation. But, when you experience a different kind of "facilities", people tend to make comparisions. There is a telugu proverb " raajunu choosina kallato mogunni chooste mottabuddhi vestundi". "mogudu" is one master. "raaju" is a superior master. The choice really doesnt make the status of "bhaarya" diferent from inferior.
I agree your point or judging lifestyles. I dont have any value judgements on american or any other lifestyles. What I cant but try to "understand" or "reason out" why they are like that. Every lifestyle has its reason in its socio-economic fabric. A certain lifestyle may suit a particular system. Americans are like that because their political economy generates such lifestyles. In india, we cannot imitate their lifestyle alone. In US too, they cannot adopt indian way of living, even if they desire to do so.
In the last leg of my US visit, our american guide there, Mr. Kenneth Adams, made a nasty comment on Indians. " you people never understand, you think that things here happen like in india, you indians have this tendency etc.." yes, americans too have their own perceptions on India.
I am not an advocate of joint families. But I am not happy about the nuclear family either. Of course, I am not even married formally, we were one of the first couples who started living together without any formal marraige. We are happy for the space we get from others and the space we give each other. But, sometimes, we miss the security of a large family. When we talk of americanism or individualism- that need not to be "foreign". In india too, we have similar islands in which people live differently and experimenting.
We too feel ocassionally " two is a crowd, three is a chaos".
I believe, everyone should have his/her own space ( as you said-bubble) and at the sametime one should have strong alliances outside the space. WE should have a street and a home aswell. In home too, personal space differs from drawing room to bedroom. A multi-level circumference will be the ideal. Tresspasses happen, but that is part of the game.
Americans are living in extreme individualism and craving for forming virtual communities on web. Our development paradigm in India too leading us towards that direction. When I think about these processes, it is not a mere comparision. Should I allow to happen similar things here too? or should I resist? the question pertains to action/inaction. not an academic querry.
 

That is very interesting. Action or inaction... How is it possible to act to change the direction that society is moving toward?

You've seen the difference among most middle-class Indians. They are spending more, saving less. They want brand names, they work the night shift at call centers, most teenage kids have girlfriends or boyfriends, etc.

Is this a move towards "westernization," or is it a move toward "individualism." Can the two be separated? In my view, the greatest export from America is not the culture (movies, songs, etc), McDonald's or any such things - it is individualism. While I agree with you in that this is taking a hold on some people in India, I don't think that Indian society and it's tight bonds of family, relations, traditions, religion, etc, will let it shape people the same way.

There is bound to be backlash and in some ways, there already is. For example, the demonstrations in front of fast-food restaurants, the outcry against Ms. World in Bangalore - can you distinguish an anti-western sentiment from an anti-individualist feeling?

How is action or inaction going to support or stop what is already happening? How will comparisons between countries help, on any level? If you notice, I keep coming back to square one - it could be the validity of my arguments, or the slant of my thinking. :0)
 

what is happening is happening because it is allowed to happen. All social, political, economic processes are human-made. They can be encouraged, supported, discouraged and stopped too.
Yes, certain processes are irreversible. you cannot bring the situation to square one. Normally people say globalisation is irreversible. Partially that is true. Players in the process are big and the tools that are helping the process are too powerful. Who are gaining from globalisation and who are losing, long-term and short-term futures.. are not yet clear. polarisation is yet to happen. When the situation is fluid and promoters of globalisation appear strong- then we tend to believe that things are unchangeable.
But, we can find a number of occasions when human interventions could change the course of history. In fact, there is no such thing as a course of history without human interventions. What inspires us to intervene in a situation or process- is clash of interest.
Individualism or westernism are more related to political economy than geography. I am not so liberal to give credit for individualism to america. Whatever are the "lifestyle offshoots" of modern age have their roots and origins more in Europe than US. Old family system was hit by industrial revolution in europe. There were no "individuals" prior to 16th century anywhere in the world. So, to the extent of the impact of industrial revolution/modern capitalism in every country we can find traces/trends of individualism. Modern "Individual" is certainly a better human being than a feudal "subject". He/she definetily has a qualitative existence. Individual has disconnected himself/herself from the old communities, values, bondages etc. In US, it appears the individual has gone too far away from the collective existence and we can find the consequences of extremities there itself.
In west, including US, people there transformed themselves according to the needs of new societies and they are participants in the processes. Hence, they accept the change with all its pros and cons. In countries like india the process is being imported without local conjunctions and participation. so, the resistance.
I come to the basic argument of your passages. do comparisions help? yes, they help. If we compare things to understand and to change ( ourselves or the society). I compare US and India, in a broader spectrum of west and east on one side, and in a political terms of north and south too. There is no meaning unless you take the heirarchies into account. I have to understand and judge the US systems (including values) differently, if they are being imposed on us. If they dont have any bearing on us, our judgements differ. WE dont bother what sort of promiscuity exists in a remote african tribe, we just study them as part of anthropology. If you emulate them or prescibe them- then the comparision will not be neutral.
Most of the middle-class indians do compare indian life with US life out of fascination and inferiority.
I have seen many good things in american life. I could learn a lot from them. But my learning is not for emulation. It enriches my understanding and it helps me to ponder over what best suits to my country. Perhaps, I am dreaming for an impossibility- privacy of individualism and security of collectivism; material comforts of modern age and spritual soothening of traditional age.
 

debate is very interesting.
 

You're right - I agree that the off-shoots of individualism began in Europe, but now Europe is not the mainstay of this ideology - it is the U.S. that actively promotes it in its culture and exports it in its products.

France is bogged down in its socialism, Britain is struggling trying to figure out if they should be aligned with tradition dominated EU or the U.S.

The only superpower in this world is the U.S., and because of its immense power, reach and interest to other countries, I think it is the biggest contributor to this ideology.

You're right in that people actively choose the direction that they want their society to grow into, but it often spirals out of control.

Did the ancients in India want the caste system to spiral out of control the way it did? Unfortunately, the privacy of individualism and security of collectivism are at such opposite ends of the spectrum, that it will hard to find a common ground. And even if it is possible, who's to say that it won't eventually evolve into something unrecognizable and scary?

The problem with all ideologies is that they reference absolutes like equality, freedom, peace - all of which are mutually opposed. Can we have freedom with the imprisonment of a few, can we have equality in a caste system, can we have peace without war (on terrorists, etc).

It's seems surprisingly simplistic, or just plain hopeful that political societies and systems are based on a "utopia," something that perhaps never existed, but we think it did and modeled ideologies on it.

Our world and our society will always be imperfect - it will never be black or white and in making comparisons, we tend to identify things as such, which ultimately gets back to my main point. :0)
 

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 

I agree with you. We have to raise our voice, but the sad thing is that even in this day and age of freedom of speech, more and more countries are restricting their press - starting with the U.S.

It may fall upon the common man - you and me, for instance - to keep up the pressure on our societies and to make sure our values and our endeavors don't disintegrate.

Thanks for your comments!