On Friday 16 May 2008 12:10:10 am Perry E. Metzger wrote: > I find this fascinating. In New York, where I live, one rarely if ever > sees anyone express anger in that way, and certainly one doesn't hear > the thought expressed much -- it would likely lead to people thinking > far worse of you if you behaved that way. I wonder what the cultural > history of the difference is. Is there an underlying assumption that > justice will rarely be done and so it must be taken in to one's own hands?
Many educated Indians as well as people unfamiliar with India find it difficult to believe how "law and order" in India (to the extent that it exists) rests on an unwritten covenant among Indians that can be traced back to what is considered as "dharma" or "rules for preserving society". It is NOT the police, or the Indian Penal Code that is primary, but pre-existing rules in society. The Indian Penal code is a super-imposition on that. Where the penal code is not enforced, what is enforced are the pre-existing rules in society. And, yes, one could call it tribal law. But the tribal law of India is called "dharma" Study how people relate to dharma in India and you get an idea of how Indians behave. Dharma is non-religious and has nothing to do with any particular god. You will find non Hindus subscribing to dharma merely because the same simple rules are applicable to any human society that pre-existed modern state constitutions and law enforcement by state agencies. shiv
