Talk:India

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Steelbrain.png

This Geography related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Copperbrain.png

"There is a great deal of controversy over whether Indians have the necessary sense of identity to qualify as a nation,"[edit]

Can someone who knows their Indian history point to some of the important figures in this debate?PFoster 13:26, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

I don't know names, but I know there is recurring tension between those who want to include all Indians without regard to religion, and those who want to include Hindus only. However, this is as much a citizenship/state question as a national one. (With that in mind, however, the Congress Party tends towards an inclusive definition, while the BJP tends to an exclusive one.) My only qualm is that I believe that some in the Congress Party accept the idea that there are multiple nations within India, but are willing to accept a "multinational" secular India. Researcher 13:31, 9 June 2008 (EDT)
This statement is utterly biased. Relegious riots are a horrible past in india and the present generation are more united than any country. Some one visit India during Olympics then u could tell the difference. — Unsigned, by: Bhuchosen / talk / contribs 11:21, 1 December 2012
Hi Bhuchosen. I can speak as an outsider living in India for many years. I understand your convictions. Indians (as a whole) are probably more patriotic than Americans. Nonetheless, a true patriot will allow that there are imperfections within one's own country. Religious riots certainly aren't common but they have happened within living memory and this wiki is dedicated to reporting the negative impact of unsubstantiated beliefs.--Brendiggg (talk) 12:28, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Churchill once said that India has as much a right of being called a nation as the equator. Pandit Nehru, India's first Prime Minister actually wrote a whole book (The Discovery of India) to contest the idea. You should note that this great "controversy" that the page talks about is a farce. There was a controversy, that is true, but it was a line of argument most forwarded by the British colonialists who were reluctant to grant freedom to India and unless this page is supportive of colonialism or is intended to mislead people for cheep laughs I believe that there is a need to remove the phrase "great deal of controversy".

This part- "particularly considering the great religious, ethnic, and linguistic divides within the modern Indian state"- is the most ridiculous thing ever written. If we go by this reasoning then the will be a thousand countries in the world. Religion is not necessary for making a country and nor is ethnicity and nor language. They are common factors but that doesn't make them necessary conditions for making a country. For the ignorant buffoons that wrote the particular thing here are a few lists: [1] [2] [3]

The paragraph further goes on to note that India is as functioning a state as Yugoslavia once was. That's abhorrent. To anyone not familiar with history Yugoslavia was once a diverse country in the Balkans that, because of political instability, disintegrated into a bunch of other countries. It seems that the author almost willfully predicting the demise of India. Well he wouldn't be the first. It was the favorite pass time of the British colonialists after India became independent in 1947. It's 2014 and India persists. So I guess the author manages to very well to give up his neo-colonialist mind set.

I understand that the idea of this page is to point out the major problems with countries but questioning the legitimacy of the largest democracy in the world in the second line of its description is just not done. It shows that either the author has no idea of what he is talking about or he is selectively biased against the idea of a diverse nation. Either way such content has no place on this page. I am rewriting the entire section:

There is a great deal of controversy over whether Indians have the necessary sense of identity to qualify as a nation, particularly considering the great religious, ethnic, and linguistic divides within the modern Indian state. However, by being a functioning democracy since independence in 1947 (with only short-lived eras of dictatorship under Indira Gandhi—not to be confused with M.K. Gandhi), it is definitely a functional state, just as Yugoslavia once was.

To be replaced with... It is a vast country with great religious, ethnic, and linguistic divides within the state which have led to sporadic clashes between varied groups in the past. This has over the course of history of the country lead to several predictions of its disintegration. However, by being a functioning democracy since independence in 1947 (with only short-lived eras of dictatorship under Indira Gandhi—not to be confused with M.K. Gandhi), it is definitely a functional state.

Hindu fundamentalist/Hindu nationalist[edit]

Why the word Hindu fundamentalist was deleted? Hindu nationalism is also known as Hindu fundamentalism and they are Indian equivalent (Hindu fundies) of American Republicans (Christian fundies). Historian 17:46, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I deleted it because Mr. Historian had some wordy syntax going on and seemed to have his knickers in a twist about the whole thing. Please go ahead and revert.PFoster 17:48, 20 November 2008 (EST)
Who had the knicker-twisting, P? Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)Approach the Presence 08:03, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Reorganizing the information to proper sections[edit]

1. Politics: This section has no mention of India having a parliamentary government. And the fact that there are several regional parties which are elected to seats in the Federal Parliament which leads to coalitions.

2. Economy: I don't know if the statistics of poverty belong in this section. If they do, I plan to add a [few latest ones] [4]

I have already made a few minor changes.. Nothing which changes the basic tempo of this article. I plan to polish this up when I find time. (I am also a very new user, so I am still reading up on the rules and other guidelines for edits.) — Unsigned, by: Sid13 / talk / contribs

Please sign talk page entries using four tildes like this: ~~~~ or by clicking on the sign button: SigButt.png, on the toolbar above the edit panel. Thank you. ħumanUser talk:Human 19:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Please add to artricle?[edit]

India has legalized gay sex: source:http://www.newser.com/story/63362/india-legalizes-gay-sex.html — Unsigned, by: Orthodoxnow16 / talk / contribs

Reformatted a bit by me. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

This page requires more edits[edit]

Woo in India - First of all,this heading is meaningless. This paragraph is filled with incorrect statements and which obviously have no references.

Openly homophobic - In the paragraph titled Gay-rights, it was stated that BJP is openly homophobic.This is factually incorrect blatant accusation without any reference.--Kar rational (talk) 16:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

I have removed the BJP thing. As for the woo bit, that's tougher. Many of the practices described in the article fall clearly within our definition of the term. Polar Bear In the Jungle Peter Tosh > Bob Marley 16:14, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
WARNING, MY PERSPECTIVE IS AS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN WITH FAMILY LIVING IN INDIA, I AM NOT QUALIFIED TO SPEAK FOR OR OVER INDIAN PEOPLE, I CAN ONLY OFFER MY PERSPECTIVE ON WHAT I MYSELF HAVE SEEN OVER THERE.


I wouldn't say Woo in India is totally beyond salvaging. My family is currently expats in India, and woo-like thought is embedded into local culture at a very visceral level. For example, before their driver consented to drive their car, they had to put it through a puja ceremony which blessed the car. There is a little statue of Ganesh on the dashboard now. Many many cars are this way; the traffic in India aside from infrastructure and poorly enforced traffic rules surely is ridiculous at least partially because a large slice of the population believes that because they have been blessed, they don't have to worry about the other people around them. While this is rooted in spirituality, this kind of magical thinking is applied to many many consumer products there all the time because it is so natural for the culture. Rituals in India are very different from often solely religious rituals here; they are in many cases firmly believed to actually impact one's life so they are seen in every aspect of a person's life. Many many things, even mundane things, have ritualistic thought applied, and there is plenty of woo that capitalizes on this mindset. This isn't to say they as a people are stupid or worse or their culture is worse. It just leads them to do stuff like make western-looking businesses and buildings and expect that because everything seems and looks the same, it should bring them the same prosperity and function in the same way as one would in America or Europe... when in fact they often should be making models to fit their own society, not mimic the west. There are many bizzare deserted shopping centers and eerily empty western-style stores there that can't serve the needs of the people around, expected to succeed because they resemble already-successful things.


However, it should be noted that unlike woo in the west, it is not done with a duplicitous intent. The people selling their products with spiritual promises in mind often are also believers; there's no person at the 'top' of the scheme that's doing it for money only. It's the sort of woo that's rooted in traditionalism, not the sort that's imported from other countries, which is a unique feature to western and imperialist countries.


Also, India actually willingly exports woo ideas; their culture is appropriated and trivialized and many residents don't mind because it makes them more notable in the global community. White, western tourists blowing all their money there is insanely profitable to them, far beyond the amount of money that most people could honestly make in day to day work.±Knightoftldrsig.pngKnightOfTL;DRfree guybrush threepwood! no new taxes! down with porcelain! 16:24, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Oh,in that case I agree. I actually searched 'woo' in dictionaries and Wikipedia which did not lead me beyond 'courtship',although now I know RationalWiki has a special meaning for that. Well, I wouldn't mind importing ideas or styles if they're reasonable from the east or west because I think that is what keeps us Human Beings from stagnation. Traditions are bad when they interfere with reason.--Kar rational (talk) 17:00, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

If you don't mind, I wanted to have more changes.


1. In the politics section- "The BJP have incited a great deal of hatred and violence against Muslims and Christians living in India". This is also a vague accusation. It is known that it promotes 'Hindu culture' but that does not equate to violence or hatred. If we are dealing with actual facts here,VHP(Vishva Hindu Parishad) and its sister organizations like Bajrang Dal have been involved in spewing hatred and committing violence towards Muslims and Christians for issues like cow slaughter and anti-conversion.Here is the link.

2.Again in the politics section, please give permission to add facts which conclude that secular platform of INC is questionable such as 1984 Anti-Sikh riots [5] and a statement by a Senior INC leader who blames atheism.[6].--Kar rational (talk) 17:03, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

You don't need permission, far as I can tell. Unless you were being reverted. i've not looked. Changed what you feel is necessary. As for india "being exceptinally willing to turn to magical thinking" this is not just pulled out of someone's head, it's very factual. There is an 8 year old child (ok, he's older now) who was quite gifted and decided to "learn medicine". and he did. sorta... he was still only 8 or 9. India embraced him as the smartest man in the world, and a world renowned healer, a reincarnation of a god, etc. not just a smart kid who read a lot.... When you have a population with very little, including very little education, but also very little water or food, you end up with a culture that must rely on religion, because the govt, the financial systems, and "science" don't work for them. Anyhow, that said, i'm not sure how one adds all that.Green mowse.pngGodot She was a venus demilo in her sister's jeans 17:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Warning:This is pointless-Yes well what can you do. We have educated people still blaming planets for their misfortunes and several 'Moral Guardians' who call western clothing as being 'slutty',people who consider Pornography being negative impact.

P.S. Indians do not have little education, see the survey. Our government and financial systems aren't that bad either. Its just that we have large economic gap in society and huge population which renders less opportunites.--Kar rational (talk) 18:01, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Please don't put in links to Wikipedia. Thanks. Polar Bear In the Jungle Peter Tosh > Bob Marley 18:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
India has lots of education but that education isn't distributed evenly and it's not always targeted to problem-solving and innovation. My sister is going to school there right now, and even a private international school her first 'art project' assigned was 'design a corporate logo.' She's 14. They are very exacting with academics there, but there is a lack of critical thinking and problem solving in her curriculum and in the mindset endorsed. And we're 'rich' foreigners; my sister gets way more opportunities than many people there. The local schools weren't even an option for us, even beyond the language divide. There's tons of educated people in India. It's just a shame that not everyone has the same shot at it, and that at least some of that education is not aimed at solving new problems but at being employable by western corporations. ±Knightoftldrsig.pngKnightOfTL;DRcritical thinking is the key to success! 19:56, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposed removal of section Acid attacks[edit]

I propose to remove the section acid attack, because these incidents seem to be rare. We cannot write about rare incidents in this huge subject. Andries (talk) 08:31, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Big problems with this article[edit]

Has it ever occurred to some that the type of thinking that leads to abuse against women is the same that leads to pseudoscience and systemic poverty among Indian people? And that their acceptance of this type of thinking perpetuates it? A "higher glass ceiling" is only good for Indian women from rich families, see Feminism#First_world.2C_middle_class_white.2C_privileged_point_of_view. I'd much rather live in the inaccurately so called "patriarchal" society that treats women with common decency like the USA or Canada or whatever than glass-record ceiling-breaker India, which is encapsulated in regressive culture. I'm looking at you too, Pakistan. Benazir Bhutto..... *shudders* --Journeyman Studios (talk) 20:16, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Reverted sentence[edit]

There's an editor who's changing the sentence "Medical pseudoscience, in the guise of Ayurvedic medicine and Unani, is widely accepted because of its antiquity and cultural relevance. " to "Medical pseudoscience is widely accepted." I'm leaning towards the former version. Also, see his message on my talk page.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 08:02, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Suggest adding some text on Astrology in India (I can expand on this). Suggestions invited. Thanks[edit]

Status of Astrology in India[edit]

What makes India's belief in Astrology special is its expansiveness and scientific status. The usage of the phrases like real astrology or scientific astrology is really common. These phrases are used to distinguish scripturally learned astrologers from the 'unscientific' ones. Basically, it is to distinguish between someone who would blatantly look stupid from those who behave like they know what they are doing. Indian space research, considered to be the forefront of scientific advancement, is making quick and appreciable progress. However even scientists at the formidable Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) have indulged in ritualistic astrological practices. This could seem contradictory to a scientist somewhere other India but this the nature of Indian mindset.

Astrology in life[edit]

Astrology plays an important role in match-making throughout India. Prospective grooms and brides horoscopes are matched before they get married. There are doshams (faults) in horoscopes that need remediation also. These doshams are also said to lead to spouse deaths. Incredibly primitive rituals are also followed for remediation many times like getting ritually married to trees or animals before the actual marriage. These are not rare occurrences. Astrologers promise everything to their clients, for e.g. better pay, better business, good looking spouse, resolution of disputes, disposal of enemies etc. Marriage, birth, death and other emotionally challenging life events is what make the astrologers major market.

Astrologer remedies[edit]

The most common remedy is doing a Pooja (ritual prayer) which is to be done by a designated priest. Another extremely common remedy is stones to be worn to placate/strengthen a strong/weak celestial body in your horoscope. All the celestial bodies for e.g. Mars, Jupiter, Moon etc have their own respective stones. This is a huge market in India. It is very common to see Indian people wearing rings with stones on their fingers. Remedies go from benign to actually harmful and play on the believers psychological weakness.

Expanse of belief[edit]

It is a myth that only Hindus in India believe in Astrology. It is a commonly and diversely held belief. Commonly because Muslims, Christians and other religions in India commonly believe in Astrology. Diversely because there is no one text or belief system that is followed. Belief systems are very different from one another.


TheBigA (talk) 14:11, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Slavery[edit]

I am going to correct the following sentence.

Today debt slavery affects 14 million Indian people; by this definition India is regarded by the Walk Free Foundation to hold half of the world's slaves.[1]

First, that number includes a variety of types of slavery, including debt bondage. Second, the reference listed gives an outdated estimate. The 2016 estimate should be more up to date and accurate than the 2013 estimate.

Ashy Waves (talk) 15:24, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Here is the corrected version.

According to the 2016 Global Slavery Index, an estimated 18,354,700 people are enslaved in modern day India, or 1.40% of the population. By this estimate, India has the fourth highest prevalence of slavery of any country, but the highest absolute number of slaves. This includes a variety of forms of slavery, including bonded labour, forced domestic service, forced begging, forced prostitution, forced marriage, and forced recruitment for armed services.[1][2]

  1. Kevin Bales, et al. "India". The Minderoo Foundation Pty Ltd. https://www.globalslaveryindex.org/country/india/. Retrieved 19 March 2018. 
  2. An unsavoury fact: India tops global slavery index. May 31, 2016 http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/an-unsavoury-fact-india-tops-global-slavery-index/article8671904.ece

Ashy Waves (talk) 15:39, 19 March 2018 (UTC)