Are Indians Hobbesian.(culture of self interest)

[livingdead]

i don't know what author was thinking when he wrote the article but surely he was frustrated at that time. The author & the OP want to show that india is the only place in whole world which has corruption issues. if someone is donating money to a temple than what has this to do with corruption. whole world spend money on religious things, what is so diff abt india??? & it was not Europeans who introduced education & schools in india. when those Europeans used to hunt in jungles semi naked at that time india was way ahead in education, medicine, arts etc etc.

Only upper caste people could get education in your gurukuls.

 

[Soumitra]

On a serious note, how many of you just looked up Hobbesian
.

the only way to secure civil society is through universal submission to the absolute authority of a sovereign.

 

[Windjammer]

Dear Windjammer I want to know which keywords do you use in google before starting any thread?

Soumitra Ji.......Scientist-At-Work. !!

5 dollar says Windjammer doesn't know the meaning of hobbesian

Currently undertaking a crash call centre course.

On a serious note, how many of you just looked up Hobbesian
I raise you a goat.

The STAKES are high....make it a Cow.

Now, you have had your thrills.....any contribution to the subject would be appreciated.

 

[JayAtl]

It's funny, the world is asking you to also look for self interest and stop your sending " special" interests into other countries

 

[alphamale]

Only upper caste people could get education in your gurukuls.

valmiki, ravidas, namdev etc etc were from upper caste right????? ignorant fool.

 

[Windjammer]

It's funny, the world is asking you to also look for self interest and stop your sending " special" interests into other countries

The article is about India, written by an Indian.....let's not drag in your own interests and obsessions. !!

 

[clmeta]

Yes, but the thread was opened by Pakistani obsessed with India.

 

[JayAtl]

The article is about India, written by an Indian.....let's not drag in your own interests and obsessions. !!

When discussing subjects bringing the geo political situation, especially in this region into it is called great data point. Btw every time an article is posted about your side of the camp you always bring India into it. So spare us the above , yeah. I got a poem for you discuss too:

Roses are red
Violets are blue
what has your kind of " interest " done for you?

 

[rishisankaran]

Religion is a very touchy subject, hence I seldom indulge in it's discussion, but the following article was written by an Indian Hindu, perhaps some Indian members would like to shed some light on the disclosures made by the author.

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 .
First:
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,
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 transactions morally.
There is no real stigma. An utterly corrupt Jaya Lalita can
make a comeback, just unthinkable in the West.
Second -
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 Turks’ 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?
Third -
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 400 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.

Scientist-At-Work: Indians are Hobbesian.(culture of self interest)[/QUOTE

Is this coming from a person who belongs to a pure land which is ruled by mr 10%. If corruption is an accepted norm in India then by the sheer comparison its the only way of life in Pakistan. Your so called rulers and military have sold your country to external powers to ensure their post retirement life in UK or US. Does Gen Mushy ring some bell in your mind ??? I agree there is a lot of corruption in India, but before commenting about Indians I would suggest you to look at the mirror and straighten things in your pure land first.

 

[kingkobra]

Religion is a very touchy subject, hence I seldom indulge in it's discussion, but the following article was written by an Indian Hindu, perhaps some Indian members would like to shed some light on the disclosures made by the author.

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 .
First:
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,
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 transactions morally.
There is no real stigma. An utterly corrupt Jaya Lalita can
make a comeback, just unthinkable in the West.
Second -
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 Turks’ 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?
Third -
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 400 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.

Scientist-At-Work: Indians are Hobbesian.(culture of self interest)

And then too we fight for taking down a hindu president and elect a muslim as our president...
thousands of people have tried to define India and Indians but we can not be generalized...India is a country of contrasts...HUGE contrasts..

 

[Subramanian]

Religion is a very touchy subject, hence I seldom indulge in it's discussion, but the following article was written by an Indian Hindu, perhaps some Indian members would like to shed some light on the disclosures made by the author.

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 .
First:
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,
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 transactions morally.
There is no real stigma. An utterly corrupt Jaya Lalita can
make a comeback, just unthinkable in the West.
Second -
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 Turks’ 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?
Third -
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 400 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.

Scientist-At-Work: Indians are Hobbesian.(culture of self interest)

As usual,

Ill informed article and wrong analysis.

 

[Windjammer]

Is this coming from a person who belongs to a pure land which is ruled by mr 10%. If corruption is an accepted norm in India then by the sheer comparison its the only way of life in Pakistan. Your so called rulers and military have sold your country to external powers to ensure their post retirement life in UK or US. Does Gen Mushy ring some bell in your mind ??? I agree there is a lot of corruption in India, but before commenting about Indians I would suggest you to look at the mirror and straighten things in your pure land first.

One Swallow does not a summer make...... you certainly have the ability to rant the banter but acute lack of comprehension.
The subject in discussion wasn't written in any far away land rather some introspection by your very own kind.

 

[anoop]

And now mir jaffar become indian . i thought most of posters here at pdf thought him as an muslim who was betrayed by eveil hindus .

 

[Shardul.....the lion]

what is hobbesian?
Please can somebody explain me? because there are several asian nations ahead of India as far as corruption is concerned?

Between I think I heard similar term in Harry Potter movies, am I right?

 

[solbadguy]

It's funny, the premise of the author's argument is based on his own assumptions and even then the conclusions he draws are false.

Case in point,

Question is: Why Indians have a transactional culture while
other 'civilized' nations don't?

Foremost, his implication that only Indians have what he calls 'transactional' culture is false, history of humanity is based on this transactional culture. And the way he alludes to other nations as civilized is laughable.

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 .

Unique, eh?

From ancient Rome to Feudal Japan this form of treachery has been so common that the author comes across as naive to not be aware of it.

And who can forget a certain Judas Iscariot?

The article appears to be more of a second grade rant on a third grade blog than be an introspection of any value.

Figures!