Indian individualism
M.V. SUBBIAH
With India turning 60 on August 15, 2007, we have been reviewing the strides we have taken since Independence. On my part, since retirement, I have had the time to ruminate over a few questions that have perturbed me over the years. I cannot say that I have the answers, but I have been on the job of developing my own hypothesis.
It is commonly accepted that one Indian is a genius; two Indians, capable of being friends; three, politicking cannot be far behind; four, rest assured you have chaos. Just how did we acquire this reputation?
Diversity
I am still trying to define the archetypal Indian. An Assamese will be twice removed by language and thrice removed by customs and physical features, to list just a few of the differences, than a fellow Indian from, say, Andhra Pradesh or Punjab. Is this diversity then our hallmark? Aside from our passports, is there anything common among us?
Granted, India comprises many States with different languages, castes, creeds, colours, cultures, cuisines, convictions, costumes, customs, faiths, climates, economic practices, political and geographic variety. Yet we have functioned for the last 60 years under the common umbrella of the Republic of India.
What makes us tick? One can state that India accepts four classes of virtues: dharma (virtue), artha (wealth), kama (pleasure) and moksa (self-realisation). In other words, ec
onomic (artha) and psychological (kama) values coexist with the moral (dharma) and spiritual (moksha). This harmony of moral, material, and spiritual values is inbuilt in the Ind
ian psyche, providing scope for our individualistic attitude and approach towards life.
Given each individual’s predisposition to view things, and given our population strength, no wonder that we have such a cacophony of arguments, opinions, beliefs, practices, ideologies and so on. That is why, perhaps, India has plenty of brilliant individuals in different fields, doing themselves and the country proud.
‘Somehow’ phenomenon
When we are denied something, we work for it, making the best of what we have. We find our own solutions, even if they are indigenous. For instance, bandhs can be crippling to a city commuter. A few years ago, our company had scheduled an important meeting. That day, the ruling party called a strike. Sensing my anxiety to reach office, my driver said, “Don’t worry sir, I will somehow take you to the office.”
True enough, he “somehow” took me to my office, albeit late by half an hour. Likewise, almost the entire staff “somehow” managed to get to work that day.
Ever since, I am in awe of this “somehow” phenomenon. An individual is at his resourceful best when pushed to “somehow” deliver. Take the instance of Dr. V. Kurien and his White Revolution, a classic case of exemplary individual contribution to India. It made us the world’s largest producers of milk.
On a countrywide level, when India was denied the knowledge and components for a super computer, we built our own. It is considered among the best in the world and incidentally, more economical. We may use the computer to solve complex problems but will perhaps have it delivered in a bullock cart!
We may be free-wheeling, robust, corrupt, inefficient and divided, yet we are flourishing. All this despite our labelled anarchic way of functioning!
Perhaps our contradictory nature evens out the anarchy of our endeavours and delivers results. That may be why the former U.S. Ambassador to India, the late John Kenneth Galbraith, called India a “functioning anarchy.”
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Open Page
