Desi Fate

Mohajir:

What a load of crap.

India is a poor country.Let us call it POOR in capitals.It is also a proud country.Let us call it PROUD in capitals.India also looks after its extended families and does not just accumulate wealth for its selfish-lust.

These are ALL virtues.

When you let someone give you freedom,You do not have it-----That is why love for the masters(former? is still there.

When you allow somebody to grant you a right,You do not have it.

This applies to lot other aspects of AZAD-human built-in characteristics.

__________________________________________________

These psychos(logists?) can PROVE anything,if there is a willing listener.

Ever heard of Never take no for an answer?Persistence,aggressiveness?

That poor chap who kept on calling was trying to be another Horatio Alger.Most Asians have been fed this Readers Digest stuff and a crash-diet of rags to riches fairy tales.

__________________________________________________

The Afghans,Ghairatmand quom,would never allow any farangi to tell him what is a proper ettiquette.The Afghan is a truly respected (& feared) everywhere.

The Indian,Pakistanees,Bangladeshis,Sri Lankans are treated like Bhangees for a reason.

They are used to this treatment by their masters at home AND do not mind treating those lower to them similarly.

Seeking security,love-for-money,non-inventiveness are the reasons Indians would always be slaves of somebody.

Those who lack GHAIRAT and cherish their life more & above it have to live like a slave...even if such overseers are called CEOs or Chairman etc.

__________________________________________________

It is the english-school system that has made you pliant & malleable & rheological.

__________________________________________________

WASSALAAM

How Westerners percieve Indians

LONDON: Indians were placed on the couch at the Nehru Centre here late last week. The hour-long session revealed the rough landscape of the inner universe of the NRIs.

The story that came out would make those living in India less envious of the green-card holders. The talk by Alan Roland, the New York-based author and practising psychoanalyst, seemed to answer the usually ignored question: What price success?

The Millennium Lecture on ``Significant differences in the Indian self compared to North European and North American self`` indicated that notwithstanding the hype about globalisation, the east and the west are unable to meet.

Citing case studies, Roland highlighted the problems encountered by Indians in their interaction with westerners. He talked about the ``bicultural self`` that develops upon immigration to western countries and compared various facets of the Indian familial self, rooted in hierarchical relationships, with the individualised self of westerners. The individualistic I-self of westerners provides a sharp contrast to the Indian We-self.

Roland illustrated how the psychological gulf between Indians and westerners living in America causes misunderstanding in work places. An Indian`s attempts to adapt at the work place causes conflict at home. Indians in America soon learn that the traits of modesty, deference, lack of assertiveness get them nowhere. In fact, normal Indian deference is often misinterpreted by superiors as passivity.

Hard-working and brilliant Indians discover that salary increases are not given unless demanded. An Indian mother learns only to distract the child by offering alternative gratification rather than saying a firm ``no``. Westerners are unable to cope with the multi-level communication, ambiguity and empathic sensing that Indians are accustomed to. Indian communication is as non-verbal as it is verbal.

Indians in whose familial self self-esteem is central, find the American forthright critiques hurtful. Accustomed to interdependence, Indians believe that asking is also a form of giving. Roland spoke of a young brilliant Indian looking for a job whom he had recommended to an American CEO friend. The young man was told that the company would inform him if a place fell vacant. But he kept ringing the CEO who was irritated, not realising that the young man by approaching him again and again was only trying to enhance the potential giver`s self-esteem.

What is proper in Indian relationships is contextually based on time, place, nature of the hierarchical relationship. Thus an Indian tends to say one thing to one person and something quite different to another on the same topic. Westerners who assume universal laws and a universal human nature can look quite askance at this.

American assertiveness, forthright verbal communication, autonomy of decision-making are internalised so that one can function in American society. But there is often a great deal of inner anguish and struggle in Indians to have these two very different selves live together. The second generation also faces great conflicts between a more Americanised self and an Indian self derived from family relationships.

Roland`s introductory remarks indicated that the impact of the self-loathing taught to Indians by their colonial masters endures. He said Indian culture and Indians were pervasively denigrated. Indians were often seen as hypocritical, deceptive, passive, dependent, effete, superstitious, lacking in individuality and having only a collective self. ``These attitudes affect Indian men much more than Indian women, who seem to be more comfortable with the indigenous culture and ways of being. I think it is still a delicate issue for many educated Indian men as to how westerners regard them.``

Nice article, as usual.

Looks like an interesting read.

Thank you.

Chowk Staff:

Just after my reply # 2, I searched for ``Diaspora`` and found no article on it. Maybe you could start using a system of ``Keywords`` as well, for each contribution on the Chowk.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Dear Ras:

Thanks for your review and introducing a very important topic. Diaspora studies will soon be in fashion among the South Asian expats.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad