The extremely low self esteem among us,has developed indifference towards our own brilliant people.We have no self confidence to certify brilliance as brilliance.We need the certificate of some foreigner.You write the most original ideas,your own Indian friends do not even talk about it.And you have to contend with persons who can only deride and insult you and congratulate themselves when they post filth against you.But they simply refuse to recognize your merit as they have no self confidence and self esteem. Ramanujam got recognition from Prof Hardy of I think Oxford University,but in India he was just an unnoticed Railway clerk,a mere matriculate. YM
On Sat, Feb 22, 2025 at 8:47 AM Rajaram Krishnamurthy <[email protected]> wrote: > SELF ESTEEM > > > > Indians have a veru slow self-esteem as evident from our groups > aand the nations far and wide; Mr Sekar often quotes to make us rise and > awakened. But what aare the four perceptions of the self esteem ? > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > I Do you agree with the fact that Indians have relatively low > self-esteem? > > I completely agree. I am an Indian who has lived in US for 15 years but > have come back to India. I studied and worked in Engineering there. > > I see that Indians are all about pleasing, fitting in, hero worshipping, > aping the west. The simplest example is the obsession with American accent > in English while not caring about speaking Hindi fluently. In fact many are > ashamed of speaking in Hindi. Yes English is a stylish, attractive sounding > language but that is it. That way if you see, Hindi is a very scientific > language. They are just languages. > > Now when I came back to India and started working somewhere (an Indian > company but MNC) I was asked by Indian colleagues -Why aren’t you using > American accent? They also associated it with my capability to do my job > right- as if speaking in American accent meant being able to do my job. I > was in a senior management position. But still I am in India! My job had > nothing to do with selling or interacting with foreign clients. So why will > I use an American accent? Also Americans dont care about your accent as far > as you speak clearly. I never had any issue with my accent in US. People > mostly said, I speak very well. And in engineerimg your job is quite > technical. Why is this a matter of shame and pride in India? Where is our > self esteem? We should be proud to speak in Hindi or have our own English > accent. Yes, clarity is important. But otherwise, China is doing it. France > is doing it. Germany is doing it. Korea is doing it. They all speak English > with their accents. And there is American English and British English. > > More on this- my friends in US who have settled there have American > accents - they are extremely well educated people doing great in their > lives and careers. Now American accent for English in America makes sense > since you need good communication skills and you are living in a foreign > country. But over time their Hindi accents have changed to American accent > as well. Hindi is a separate language spoken differently. I understand this > can happen naturally if you are not paying attention to your speech. But > when it is important to speak English in American accent because that is a > “truer version” of English, why is it not important to speak Hindi in its > “true” accent? Especially because it's your native language that you spoke > in all your life! > > > > It's simple. No self esteem. They think English is superior. I think this > is the exact reason why Britishers could rule in India. Indians simply > bowed to them and thought they were better. Why? Because they don't care to > know about their country and it's greatness. Just blind followers. > > (ps: Another small example and observation. Buddha taught mindfulness to > the world in the form of Vipassana meditation. I have sat and served > Vipassana courses for more than two decades. The west, especially US, > noticed this and started selling it (like they always do, US is great at > selling anything). Now they have courses in mindfulness in their > universities especially Stanford etc, incorporated mindfulness in cognitive > therapy etc and have started re-teaching it to the world. Even UK top > universities have seen the value of it and are teaching it in universities. > Many world renowned names like Ekhart Tolle, Jon Kabat Jinn etc are > teaching mindfulness as if they have discovered it themselves , they never > give any credit to the Vipassana courses they have done and the teachers > from whom they have learnt, especially the Buddha. However now Indian > psychologists go and learn these new psychology courses from the west and > are in awe of it. In a few years, people in India will think mindfulness > came from the west. Same story for Ayurveda or Yoga. Why? Because Indians > have no self-esteem. They just want to praise and hero-worship “others”. No > self-knowledge or pride about their own nation.) {QUORA} > > > > II Whenever someone is pulled up for jumping the queue at, say, > passport counters in international airports, we are embarrassed—as it is > almost always an Indian or an equally insensitive person from our immediate > neighbours. As soon as a plane lands or a train stops, everyone jumps up > and seems to be in a tearing hurry, jostling with co-passengers, to get > out. It may sound too sweeping to brand an entire people as too restlessly > self-centred, but we all know that it is quite true. We are not arguing > that others may not be self-obsessed; we are only trying to understand why > most of us appear to be so inconsiderately pushy. > > In 1976, Richard Dawkins created quite a stir with his The Selfish Gene, where > he declared that winning genes are self-reinforcing and spread faster and > greater because they succeed in achieving their tasks. He also introduced > the theory of ‘memes’ describing them as elements of a culture or systems > of behaviour that are passed from one individual to another—by imitation. > As in the physical world, in society too ‘memes’ or imitational behaviour > spread more voluminously if they achieve their targeted gains. Applying > this trait to our society, we may put it rather simply and surmise that > everyone pushes around as those who pushed first profited in their > objective. They were not reprimanded despite violating normal decency and > patience, and they succeeded in moving forward, even at the cost of causing > discomfort to others. On the other hand, Dutch historian Rutger Bergman > argues in his recent book, Humankind, that humans are not as intrinsically > selfish as believed. He insists, after considerable mapping of humans and > their actions, that acts of kindness are also powerfully contagious. > > What then triggers the ‘me-first’ attitude among Indians that really > stands out more in international comparisons? Honking cars unnecessarily is > just another aspect of this same inconsiderate social behaviour. The same > person would be driving perfectly quietly, without blowing his horn, if he > were abroad and there he would abide by the consensus or face heavy fines > and public scorn. The same unconcerned disposition is quite visible in the > practice of keeping our homes as clean as possible but bothering little > about littering public places and thoroughfares. Before we go deeper in > examining why our inclinations differ so sharply when it comes to ‘common > concerns’, let us also analyse the notable international sporting events > where Indians have won medals. We are talking of the Olympics (woefully few > medals), Commonwealth Games, Asian Games and such other prestigious > championships. > > We discover that almost all of these medals were for individual > excellence—shooting, wrestling, boxing, athletics, badminton, tennis, > weightlifting, chess, swimming and so on. Yes, we have won medals in team > games like hockey, which is really an exception to this ‘rule’. Our > post-colonial obsession with cricket is thanks to the incredible amount of > investment made in the game and in its seductive and addictive televising. > The point is that we seem to excel where we have to fight it alone, whereas > where we need to work as a team, say, in football, a nation of 1.3 billion > has not yet produced its ‘eleven’ for top class international football. > > > > The whole idea of this little exercise is not to denigrate but to try to > understand the phenomenon. One possible reason is evident in the most > populous religion on this subcontinent, on which base ‘grew’ other later > religions. The mad rush at many temples and other sacred sites during > festivals and pilgrimages is certainly not for the faint-hearted. And > frankly, while everyone jostles, elbows and tramples over everyone else, we > pray only for our welfare and prosperity and, of course, for our family. > This, again, needs to be appreciated as an act of seeking ‘individual > salvation’ ,not necessarily (or rarely) for the community. Abrahamic > religions, on the other hand, emphasise communitarian brotherhood, while we > are genetically programmed to obtain our own good, come what may. The > lavish gifts or daana at the temples are often quite transactional in > nature, and piety is quite purchasable—as in some churches. > > How else would a completely unorganised religion that has no Vatican, no > one Bible, no agreed cadre of preachers survive through so many > millennia—had it not been for the mandate to pay for the services of the > priest and the ritual practitioner? The latter belonged to one varna or > caste group and were often quite captive within a society that demanded > that they do not seek better vocations. We are, of course, referring to the > prescribed norm. The short point is that this priesthood needed its clients > and benefactors. They served them by connecting them directly to the > Almighty, even if it warranted shoving others out of the way. What we need > to note is that this class succeeded in uniting an incredibly diverse > country by injecting common beliefs and rituals. > > It is quite possible that we inherited this socially accepted behaviour > that shaped our cultural genes and stamped our ‘memes’, which, in turn, > left its indelible mark on our general attitude to life. The ‘community’ > emerged much later—during the Bhakti movement, with bhajans and other > institutions. But the core attitude continued to be self-oriented even when > we became more inclusive and egalitarian. > > Jawhar Sircar > > Retired civil servant. > > > > III The assertion that the majority of the population in India is > "self-centred" is a generalization that needs careful examination. While > it is true that many individuals across the world exhibit self-interest in > various degrees, this statement about India specifically requires a deeper, > more nuanced analysis of socio-cultural, economic, and psychological > factors. In this essay, we will explore the concept of self-centeredness, > analyse its roots in Indian society, and consider whether this trait is > widespread or whether it is merely a perception. The analytical focus will > examine the role of truth, societal expectations, and the influence of the > environment in shaping individual behaviour. > > 2 Understanding Self-Centeredness and Truth: Self-centeredness is > often described as excessive preoccupation with oneself, disregarding the > needs, feelings, or rights of others. This trait can manifest as egoism, > narcissism, or individualism. It can also be seen as a natural survival > instinct, where one focuses primarily on personal gains, well-being, and > success, sometimes at the expense of others. Truth, in this context, can > be seen as the objective reality about human nature and societal behaviour. > However, the interpretation of truth is subjective and can differ based on > culture, history, and personal experiences. In Indian society, like in any > other, the concept of self-interest exists but is intricately intertwined > with collective values and a complex social fabric. To understand the claim > of widespread self-centeredness in India, we must explore factors such as > family structures, cultural norms, religious teachings, and socio-economic > conditions. > > 3 Cultural and Religious Influence on Self-Interest: India’s > social structure has historically been defined by *strong communal ties.* In > traditional Indian society, the family unit has been a cornerstone of life. > In many parts of India, extended families live together, where individuals > are taught to prioritize family honour over personal desires. However, in > the past few decades, societal changes, particularly the shift towards > urbanization and globalization, have introduced a more individualistic > culture. This shift, often associated with Western influence, has led to a > growing > sense of personal autonomy. Religious teachings also play a significant > role in shaping attitudes toward self-interest. Hinduism, India’s > predominant religion, often advocates for a balance between self-care and > altruism. The idea of dharma (duty) suggests that individuals should act > selflessly for the greater good. Similarly, Buddhism and Jainism, which > have roots in India, emphasize compassion and non-violence, promoting > selflessness and consideration for others. However, in practice, the > pressures of modern life, including competition, economic disparity, and > societal expectations, can lead individuals to focus more on personal gain > rather than communal or familial well-being. The pursuit of material > success often overshadows these spiritual teachings, creating a tension > between self-centred behaviour and traditional values of interconnectedness. > > 4 Economic Factors and Individualism: India’s rapid > economic growth over the past few decades has transformed the country in > numerous ways. The liberalization of the economy, an increase in > entrepreneurial opportunities, and a growing consumer market have > encouraged people to pursue personal success. In cities, this has led to > the rise of individualistic values, with a stronger emphasis on > self-reliance and personal achievement. The competitive nature of the job > market also fosters an environment where individuals may adopt a > self-centred mindset to survive or thrive. On the other hand, India is > still a country with extreme economic disparities. In rural areas and among > lower-income populations, survival often becomes the primary concern, > leading people to focus more on their own immediate needs rather than the > larger social or collective good. *Here, self-centeredness could be > understood not as a moral flaw, but as a survival mechanism. *In such > circumstances, truth about human nature and self-interest could be seen > through the lens of economic necessity, where personal well-being takes > precedence. > > 5 The Role of social media and Modern Influence: The rise of digital > media and the proliferation of social media platforms has drastically > changed the way people interact, especially in urban India. Social media > often promotes a culture of self-presentation, where individuals are > encouraged to focus on their image, personal achievements, and lifestyle. > In this environment, it is easy to see how individuals might become more > self-centred, as they compete for attention, validation, and approval from > their peers. Moreover, the curated reality presented on platforms like > Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter may lead to unrealistic expectations and a > heightened focus on personal success. People may be driven by the need for > external validation, often at the expense of authentic connection with > others. In this context, self-centeredness is not only a product of > personal desire but is also a consequence of a media-driven culture that > prizes individual achievements over collective progress. > > 6 Social Expectations and the Pressure to Conform: Despite these > individualistic influences, Indian society also places a strong emphasis on > social obligations, duty, and respect for elders. However, the pressure > to conform to societal norms can create a paradox where individuals must > balance personal desires with collective expectations. For instance, many > Indians experience intense pressure to succeed academically, > professionally, and financially, often for the benefit of the family or > community. This can lead to self-centred behaviour in the pursuit of > these external goals. On the flip side, the desire to maintain social > status can foster selflessness when it comes to certain communal or > familial responsibilities. In many Indian communities, contributing to the > welfare of the family and larger society is seen as a source of pride. > Nevertheless, the balance between fulfilling personal ambitions and social > responsibilities can be difficult, especially when personal success becomes > equated with self-worth. > > 7 The Truth About Self-Centeredness in India: The question of > whether the majority of the population in India is self-centred is complex. > It is essential to recognize that self-centeredness, as a trait, is not > inherently good or bad; it is shaped by societal norms, economic > conditions, and cultural influences. The truth about self-centeredness in > India lies in the nuanced interplay of traditional values and modern > pressures. In some contexts, self-interest may be a reflection of survival > instincts or the pursuit of individual achievement in a rapidly changing > world. In other cases, it may be a manifestation of the struggle to meet > societal expectations or compete in an increasingly globalized economy. > Ultimately, the extent to which self-centeredness dominates the behaviour > of individuals in India depends on their socio-economic background, > exposure to external influences, and the evolving cultural landscape. The > path to understanding this issue requires acknowledging the complexity of > human nature and recognizing that self-interest is often balanced with the > drive to contribute to the larger community. > > > > In the broader sense, the truth about self-centeredness is not absolute, > but rather subjective, shaped by the ever-changing realities of Indian > society. > > > > IV 'I think Indian men are terribly selfish and egoistic about > childbearing' > > Talking of compulsory sterilization, Bulbul said, "It should have happened > ten years ago. I am all for it even now. After all, the population > explosion is the most basic of all our problems." She thinks that a small > family calls for a much healthier atmosphere. "I think children need more > attention than affection, and the only way a mother can give them enough > attention is to have fewer children. I personally wanted to have only one > child but some of my friends who are only children themselves convinced me > that that was hard on the child." > > Bulbul Sharma, a young mother with a two-year old daughter is expecting > her second child. Her husband and she have decided that she undergo > sterilization after the baby is born this September "It's easiest for a > woman to have herself sterilized at the time of childbirth, and since that > is the case, I don't see why my husband should go through it unnecessarily " > > Talking of compulsory sterilization, Bulbul said, "It should have happened > ten years ago. I am all for it even now. After all, the population > explosion is the most basic of all our problems." She thinks that a small > family calls for a much healthier atmosphere. "I think children need more > attention than affection, and the only way a mother can give them enough > attention is to have fewer children. I personally wanted to have only one > child but some of my friends who are only children themselves convinced me > that that was hard on the child." > > In the case of the economically deprived classes, she feels that > inhibitions in facing the facts of life are gradually dying. "The younger > generation is becoming quite aware. But the other day I came across an > educated army officer's wife with four daughters who yet wanted a son. I > was quite shocked." > > Bulbul thinks that the attitude of the Indian male towards sterilization > is a major obstacle. "I think Indian men - particularly from the working > class - are terribly selfish and egoistic about childbearing. Sterilization > strikes them, even when applied to their wives, as an insult to their > capacity to produce children or an offense to their virility " > > Mr K.K. Handa, secretary in a government enterprise, was completely in > favour of compulsory sterilization. He felt that though sterilization is a > "stern and strict" measure it nevertheless seems to be becoming a > necessity, "if there is to be a major control of the country's population > growth." > > A father of two sons, Mr Handa said, "Even if I had daughters, I wouldn't > have tried for a third child with the hope of producing a son." Children, > he feels, are expensive and he cannot afford to have more than two. He > feels that if a parent takes the responsibility of bringing a child into > this world, they owe the child a comfortable upbringing at least and should > try to offer the child the best opportunities possible. > > However, Mr Handa said he could quite understand why people insist on > having a son. "How many openings are there for women in India? He felt that > though there have been tremendous changes in the old concept of women being > the men's shadows, there is still a great deal left to be one "before the > position of a daughter becomes equal to that of a son." > > Unlike many, Mr Handa is aware that sterilization can be reversed. When he > went to a doctor to get sterilized the doctor advised him to wait till the > elder son was at least six years old because of the high infant mortality > rate. > > Mr Handa felt that the reason why so few people believed in sterilization > was because nobody had bothered to convince the men or women concerned that > sterilization does not cause impotency and makes no difference in the > sexual relationship of a couple. > > Dhanno is a middle-aged housewife of Masijad Moth village her husband is a > mali and between them they have produced eleven children, eight of whom are > living today They are conscious that they have too many children, and like > couples in their position, are honest enough to believe that realization > came too late. > > As a result Dhanno has to work in the nearby colony of South Extension to > support her family "What could I do?" she said, "the babies came one after > the other It is only now I realize how much simpler life would have been > with fewer children. But now that they are in this world, I naturally wish > the best for them." > > Dhanno had herself sterilized three years ago, after her youngest son, who > is now three years old, was born in a taxi on the way to the hospital. "I > was sick and tired of the old routine," she said, talking of child bearing > and rearing. When she had herself sterilized it was in the face of severe > opposition from her husband, who knew nothing about it till she had > actually enrolled herself in the hospital. "He grumbled like mad when he > had to sign the papers but the doctors finally persuaded him. He kept > thinking that the operation would kill me, he created a terrible scene in > the hospital saying, who will look after the children after you are gone," > said Dhanno laughingly > > After her operation was over and she came back to the village, several > other women, assured by her safety, went along and had themselves > sterilized. > > "But," says Dhanno with pride shining through her eyes, "I was the first. > I was the one who introduced it in the village." > > "Lack of resources and overpopulation is a fatal combination which leads > to sterilization becoming a necessary evil," said Mrs. R. Bedi, a mother of > two daughters, a golfing enthusiast, and wife of a Director in Dunlops, > living in Calcutta.rs. Bedi felt that the initial reaction regarding > compulsory sterilization was not a very pleasant one. "One tends to > consider it an encroachment on one's personal rights." But because of the > explosive problem India is facing, she thought this would be the "quickest > means to control population growth." > > She was of the opinion that it was unnecessary to overpublicize > sterilization. There are already so many problems in imposing such a > measure like religious prejudices, superstition and ignorance. Too much > publicity will only succeed in accentuating them rather than solving them." > According to her sterilization should be made routine. "Immediately after a > woman has her third child she should be sterilized." If a couple already > has more than three children then the operation should be performed on > whichever partner for whom it is medically simpler " > > Commenting on the problems of those who continue to produce children in > the hope of producing a boy Mrs. Bedi said, "It's one thing to bring in > children into the world and another to bring up children." She too would > have liked to have had a son "but there is no guarantee that the next child > is going to be a boy There has to be a stop somewhere. Besides there are > more important issues at stake rather than what sex your children belong > to." > > The husband Inderjit is a Sikh and the wife, Nasreen, a Muslim. They have > three daughters, all under six. Nasreen said she felt compulsory > sterilization should be enforced, but only in the case of a certain class > of people. "Those who cannot afford to have more than two to three children > should not be allowed to produce more." The husband, though of the same > opinion, felt that unless the couple could be guaranteed a free operation > to reverse sterilization if their child happened to die or anything like > that, the operation as a compulsory measure was too harsh. > > Who should undergo the operation, the husband or the wife? "The husband > definitely," said Nasreen. She felt that women had their share of physical > pain during childbirth and it was about time the husband shared some > responsibility Nasreen also said that in India, if at all, either one of > the couple was unfaithful it was usually the husband. Sterilization, she > thought, could act as a safety measure making it impossible for a man to > get other women pregnant. Inderjeet also felt that it was better for the > man to undergo sterilization, though not for the same reason. "There are > fewer complications and the operation is simpler if performed on a man," he > said. > > With their eldest child already at boarding school, Inderjeet Singh said, > "I want to be able to give my daughters the best of education, and not just > in the academic sense. So that they can pursue whatever career they want > without having to face any difficulties. Frankly, these days it does not > matter at all-women are doing greater things than men." > > Dorcie Roche 24, a Roman Catholic married Michael in February 1975. Since > she had been working as a help for the past six years, she was keen to > retain her job. She said, "I enjoy working and I enjoy being married. I did > not want to have a child immediately My husband did not want a child either > We thought if I went on what they call 'the pill' I would easily be able to > prevent having a child." In keeping with her desire she went to the nearest > Family Planning Centre to get herself a reliable contraceptive. > > The doctor on duty dissuaded her from going on the pill explaining, > "Before having the first child you should not use any contraceptive. It is > important for you to bear a child. Your age is just right. If you go on the > pill now it might hamper your being able to conceive when you want to. Have > your first child and at the most one more, then have yourself sterilized." > After her visit to the Family Planning Centre, Dorcie was frightened at the > prospect of not being able to bear any children. In a slight panic she let > circumstances take their own course, as a result of which she was pregnant > a month after her marriage. Now she has a beautiful four month-old baby boy > > For the future, Dorcie and Michael both plan to wait a couple of years. In > fact, they are even considering not having any more children so that they > can concentrate all their resources and care on Perkins Roche-their son. > "That," said Michael, with considerable pride , "is what matters the > most-how you bring up your children." > > Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > K Rajaram IRS 22225 > -- *Mar* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHC%2BtRGeusn66uy080_qB%3DtqYE4NFWxiJkk-6aqLEo2At3Q%40mail.gmail.com.
