Why Do Many Indians Develop Contempt for Their Own People?
Why Do Many Indians Develop Contempt for Their Own People?
A Colonial Legacy Sustained by Paid Media and Intellectual Elites**
One of the most disturbing traits visible in modern India is the ease with which Indians express contempt—sometimes outright hatred—towards their own fellow citizens. Ordinary people are routinely described as ignorant, corrupt, uncivilized, irrational, casteist, misogynistic, sexually frustrated, and incapable of self-governance.
This contempt is not accidental. It is manufactured, institutionalized, and continuously reinforced through education, media, and elite intellectual discourse.
At its core, this mindset is a colonial inheritance, carefully preserved and repackaged for post-independence India.
Colonial Justifications and Their Psychological Aftermath
During the freedom struggle, when Indians demanded independence and voting rights, the British justified their rule by claiming that Indians :
Lacked moral character
Were ignorant and selfish
Were corrupt and irrational
Were incapable of governing themselves
British rule, they argued, existed for the benefit of Indians.
These claims were relentlessly repeated through colonial newspapers, books, and academic writings until they seeped into public consciousness.
As a small section of Indians gained Western education, many began internalizing these arguments to distance themselves from the masses and appear “civilized” and “equal” to the British. Over time, terms like “educated,” “aware,” and “progressive” were weaponized to imply that those without formal education were inferior or unfit to make decisions.
After independence, instead of being dismantled, this ideology was quietly embedded into textbooks, academic discourse, and media narratives, ensuring its survival across generations.
Section A: How Paid Media Perpetuates Colonial Thinking
This ideology is planted early. Students are forced to memorize textbooks to pass exams, turning ideological bias into unquestioned “facts.”
Primary Sources of Indoctrination
History textbooks
Political science and sociology textbooks
Electronic and print media
Academic commentary and opinion columns
1. How History Textbooks Distort Reality
Elite narratives deliberately minimize the role of technology and weaponry in historical outcomes to promote pacifism among the masses and retain elite control.
For example:
Alexander the Great is described as “brave and valiant,” but textbooks rarely mention his 18-foot spears, cavalry saddles, or multi-storey siege towers.
Babur’s artillery, which decisively changed Indian warfare, is often reduced to a passing mention.
Similarly, when discussing British conquest, textbooks avoid a simple truth:
The British had guns. Most Indian kingdoms did not.
Instead, defeat is blamed on:
Disunity
Betrayals
Internal conflicts
Figures like Mir Jafar and Jaichand are endlessly recycled to suggest that Indians are inherently treacherous.
Why This Argument Is Flawed
Betrayal exists in every civilization and every era.
The real difference lies in institutions and justice systems.
In India, justice was monopolized by elites, breeding resentment.
In Britain, jury trials emerged as early as the 12th century, limiting aristocratic oppression and stabilizing loyalty.
Even the popular narrative of Jaichand betraying Prithviraj Chauhan is historically disputed by several scholars.
2. Political Science & Sociology: Blaming the Citizen
These subjects repeatedly assert that:
Indians are corrupt
Democracy in India is immature
Citizens lack political awareness
Bharat’s problems stem from its people
Why This Is Misleading
Human behavior is remarkably similar worldwide. What differs is administrative design.
For example:
In the U.S., citizens can replace police chiefs.
In Bharat, police accountability flows upward—to politicians—not downward to citizens.
Corruption thrives not due to culture, but due to absence of citizen control.
How Textbooks Hide Administrative Truths
Bhartiya textbooks deliberately avoid explaining:
Right to Recall
Elected police chiefs
Citizen-controlled prosecutors
Jury trials
Why?
Because informed citizens would demand structural reforms that limit elite power.
Instead, students are taught to blame themselves.
Section B: The Role of Paid Intellectuals
Paid intellectuals portray the average Indian as:
Irrational
Ill-tempered
Sexually frustrated
Communal and casteist
Lacking national character
Repeated endlessly, these claims cause educated individuals to develop disdain for the masses.
Ironically, the more educated a person becomes, the more likely they are to absorb this contempt.
Education Does Not Produce Moral Superiority
If education automatically produced ethics:
Judges would not be accused of nepotism
Bureaucrats would not amass illegal wealth
IPS officers would not accumulate crores
Clearly, education is not the solution. Institutional accountability is.
Civil Services and Anti-Common Bias
Civil service curricula systematically:
Blame citizens for governance failures
Promote authoritarian control
Discourage expansion of citizen rights
By the time candidates clear exams, many genuinely believe that empowering citizens would destroy the nation.
Debunking Common Myths About Bhartiyas
Over decades, paid media and elite intellectual circles have manufactured a set of stereotypes about Indians and repeated them so frequently that they are now accepted as self-evident truths. These claims are not supported by data, comparative analysis, or institutional reasoning. They exist primarily to shift blame away from governance failures and onto ordinary citizens.
Let us examine these myths one by one.
Myth 1: Indians Are Sexually Frustrated and Obsessed with Vulgarity
This claim is not only insulting but intellectually lazy.
Reality:
Sexual deviance, vulgarity, and obsession with explicit content exist in every society in roughly comparable proportions. What differs is how much of it is allowed to enter public space, which is entirely determined by law and regulation, not by culture or collective psychology.
In 2015, the Indian government allowed web content and online series to bypass traditional censorship through a self-regulation model. Predictably, this led to an explosion of profanity, violence, and sexually explicit material in mainstream digital entertainment.
This does not mean Indians suddenly became more vulgar. It means:
Legal barriers were removed
Market incentives rewarded shock value
Producers exploited regulatory freedom
Paid intellectuals deliberately confuse existence of vulgar content with public demand for its open display. If strict censorship had remained in place, such content would have stayed fringe, illegal, and commercially unviable.
Instead of questioning flawed policy, these intellectuals blame the audience—an intellectually dishonest tactic that protects both the state and corporate interests.
Myth 2: Indians Are Inherently Casteist and Vote Only Based on Caste
This argument ignores basic political science.
Reality:
Humans across the world form social groups—based on race, class, religion, region, ethnicity, or profession. Caste is merely one such identity structure.
Empirical studies consistently show that only a small minority of voters (roughly 2–3%) vote purely on caste considerations. Most voters prioritize:
Candidate credibility
Local performance
Welfare delivery
Party alignment
Caste-based voting persists primarily because Bharat follows a first-past-the-post electoral system, which amplifies identity blocs.
This problem can be drastically reduced through:
Instant Runoff Voting (IRV)
Preferential Voting Systems
These systems weaken identity politics and force candidates to appeal to broader coalitions.
Yet, political science textbooks deliberately omit these alternatives, choosing instead to portray Indians as primitive voters. This protects the two-party elite structure while vilifying citizens.
Myth 3: Indians Sell Their Votes for Money and Alcohol
This claim is statistically dishonest.
Reality:
In any democracy, a small percentage of voters—usually 1–2%—engage in vote-selling. This is a global phenomenon, not a Indian peculiarity.
The real reason vote-buying exists in Bharat is the absence of institutional deterrents, especially:
Right to Recall
Mid-term accountability mechanisms
Politicians know that once elected, they are untouchable for five years. Under such conditions, bribery becomes a rational electoral investment.
In countries where citizens can recall elected representatives, vote-buying is rare because votes are not permanently owned.
When confronted with this solution, the same intellectuals who accuse Indians of selling votes suddenly fall silent—because reform would reduce elite power.
Myth 4: Indians Are Dirty and Unhygienic by Nature
This is one of the most deeply internalized colonial insults.
Reality:
Public cleanliness is influenced by:
Poverty
Population density
Availability of space
Municipal accountability
Enforcement of penalties
It has nothing to do with culture.
Globally, only 2–5% of people litter habitually. In societies where penalties are enforced, behavior corrects itself. In societies where mayors, contractors, and inspectors are corrupt, filth accumulates.
In India:
Mayors are rarely accountable to citizens
Municipal staff cannot be recalled
Sanitation budgets are siphoned off
Blaming citizens for structural failures is convenient—but false.
Myth 5: Indians Have No Traffic Sense
This is perhaps the most absurd accusation.
Reality:
Traffic discipline is an outcome of governance, not mindset.
Bhartiya governments have failed at:
Building continuous footpaths
Controlling stray cattle and dogs
Regulating street vendors
Ensuring proper driver training
Preventing bribery in license issuance
Enforcing traffic laws consistently
When pedestrians, animals, vendors, cyclists, and cars are forced to share the same space, chaos is inevitable—regardless of culture.
Yet, no intellectual dares blame:
Transport ministries
Municipal corporations
Police departments
It is easier to insult citizens than confront institutions.
Myth 6: Hindus Are Declining Because They Are Disunited
This narrative is politically useful but intellectually hollow.
Reality:
The strength of a religious or social group depends on institutional control, not abstract unity slogans.
Hindu temples are largely controlled by state or private trustees, not devotees. Funds are mismanaged, welfare is neglected, and community institutions remain weak.
In contrast:
Sikh institutions are controlled by Sikh bodies
Gurudwara funds are used for education, healthcare, and relief
Unity without institutional control is meaningless.
Organizations that push the “Hindus are weak because they are divided” narrative benefit organizations, not civilization.
Final Observation
Every one of these myths serves the same purpose:
Protect elites
Blame citizens
Prevent structural reform
Once citizens are convinced that they themselves are the problem, they stop demanding accountability from those in power.
That is the real success of paid media.
Section C: The Blame Game
Every failure is reduced to:
“The Indian mindset.”
This narrative is so normalized that even unpaid individuals repeat it, prefacing insults with “we Indians ” to appear enlightened while exempting themselves.
This is not awareness—it is self-loathing disguised as intellect.
Conclusion: The Real Crisis
Bharat does not suffer from a crisis of character.
It suffers from a crisis of institutions and a colonial mindset preserved by elites.
Blaming ordinary citizens is easy.
Reforming power structures is difficult.
Paid media chooses the easy path.
So do those who wish to feel superior without challenging authority.
Comments
Post a Comment