Hard hitting article. The following message from New Zealand is
forwarded as received. *Makes interesting reading*
A New Zealander's view on reason for corruption in India:
Indians are Hobbesian (Culture of self interest)
Corruption in India is a cultural aspect. Indians seem to think
nothing peculiar about corruption. It is everywhere.
Indians tolerate corrupt individuals rather than correct them.
No race can be congenitally corrupt.
But can a race be corrupted by its 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.
Such a plea acknowledges that favours 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/mosques/church, 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/mosques/church etc 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
JayaLalita 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 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.
*BRIAN
from*
*Godzone NEW ZEALAND*
Sadly....yes !
(Incidentally, New Zealand is one of the least corrupt nations in the world.) 
💐
💐
No comments:
Post a Comment