Question Home

Position:Home>Philosophy> If the INDIANS are becomming westren in INDIA,then why INDIANS living in the wes

Question: If the INDIANS are becomming westren in INDIA,then why INDIANS living in the west not following the westrens!?
most the families living in the forgin are not following the forgin rule and regulations of the country they live (indians) they are fighting against the law that not suite them ,but live and earn from that country!. many cases are in uno !. what do you think!.INDIANS are doing good by entertaining them in INDIA LIKE FORGIN TRADIONS BUT fighting against in the westren countries!? thanks!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:
i think it's because living outside of india makes you value the culture more!.!. it's one of those situations where you don't realize the importance of something until youre far from it!.
but this is for people who actually do uphold their culture, because sadly not everyone does!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

This is a phenomenon that happens quite often, with many, if not all, groups that move to a new place with a new culture!.

For instance, in France the French are quite liberal with their language!. They appropriate english terms as they please and seem not to care too much for keeping their language "pure"!.

On the other hand, here in Quebec where I live, it is quite the opposite (the french having come here a long time ago)!. Instead of appropriating english terms, the french here fight hard to keep their language 'pure' or 'strictly french'!. For instance, in France email is called 'email' as it is in English, but here in Quebec they have created a new french word to take its place!.

Clearly this is in a way different than what is going on with Indians, but at it's core I think it is the same!. What is actually going on is a striving to keep the culture alive in a place where it is not the native culture - the west - and lacks all of the systems (language, custom, religion etc) that keep the culture alive in the homeland!.

Typically what happens is that the homeland is more comfortable with moving away from its traditions (in the Indian case, Forgin rule, or language for the French), because they are so embedded - little things can change because the overall structure stays the same!. When groups move abroad, to the west for instance, groups try much harder to keep things from changing because there is no overall structure to support them: if they let too much change, the culture and traditions can disappear altogether, or at least that's how the theory goes!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

indians is a lable - if you remove the label then you can see that anyone can refuse to follow our traditions including you and i!.

try to see people as individuals instead of a race/religion so forth and so on!.

when immigrants come in mass to a country it is natural for them to stick together till they learn the language/customs so forth and so on - in addition they can be lonely!.

the english did it, the irish - the german so forth and so on - not all but more likely when they come in large groups!.

you most likely stick with your family, co workers, church people - people you game with - well maybe maybe not!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Indians have a solid mind!.
I lived in Gulf for 13yrs!. Our only aim was to earn money and return!.
We didn't want to follow their tradition and God !. But we see and enjoy and respect them and their tradition!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Indians never become western even when they act like one sometime, they hold on there culture strongly!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

People who answered before me most likely have no indian friends at all!. They are nothing compared to a part of a country that chooses to hold on to a malfunctioning, dying language like Canadian French!. I suppose the same person feels strongly that people who live in and around New Orleans speak French or Cajun French like in the movies!? Well, we don't!. Although, with technology only gratifying certain, mainstream languages (you can't type ebonics on your iphone, i!.e!.), it's drowning out the dwindling useless second rate languages such as Cajun and Canadian French!. ANYWAYS! The Indians who MOVED west and live in the western hemisphere (even south america) are very much "westernized!." Most indians I know where jeans and dress up like Americans do!. They hold onto their culture b/c there's this sense of family in their beliefs and that you must marry into not only your own race, but your own caste within your caste system (Gujarthi, Jain, Seikh!.!.!.)!. To marry someone, you have to have your families set it up!. Arranged marriages in the west aren't as big of a problem right now like it is in the eastern hemisphere!. also, because of their segregation from each other, indians hold functions, very large elaborate gatherings, usually for a third cousin's spouse's niece (or something to the extent where in the U!.S!. you're technically not related to these people, but you go anyway b/c you're forced by your family and their friends who will be disgraced if you turn your back on traditions)!. At these gatherings, you meet other eligible indians who you will eventually get to know before having a lavish wedding yourself, inviting the same whole indian community that spands international borders!.
Indians I know, within the same caste systems but not of the same caste level, will not and do not allow themselves to talk to each other about personal matters!.
India itself (England, Africa, Canada, U!.S!., South America all have very large indian populations, so they're not confined to one country) has been undergoing a revolution in that it's not so much as looked down upon to be seen in public with a man who isn't related to you!. Ten or twenty years ago that wouldn't have existed!. Marriages were arranged to where the spouses had to line up behind a red curtain and wait for it to fall before laying eyes on the person you were about to be married to, if they even bothered to show up at all - word of mouth about you, anything bad, could leave you "at the alter" stood up and disgraced!. With alot of American corporations moving to India (credit card companies, refineries, chemical plants, tourism) they have been feeling an influx of wealth from the West and have adopted American films and dress, food, clothes, culture, and way of life!. Some still stick to the old days of wearing saris and covering their heads in the presence of a man, maybe even staying hidden behind the walls of the zenana!. As British rule left India, the women were given choices to become a modern day woman and be seen in public, or stay hidden within the confines of the house where only relatives laid eyes on them!.
The ones who moved across oceans to live in the west live very mundane lives, and only don the indian native cultures for special life occasions and to fill their lives with a sense of placement and purpose!. Majority of India is still poor and under developed, away from technology and the influence of the westernized rule!. It's like asking a caveman why he doesn't shave his beard or where boxer briefs to fit in!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Its diffiicult to address your question without access to the evidence you cite!. However in this case study( web site 1!.) of Indians living in Queensland in Australia, the situation seems to be very different from the one you describe!. Nevertheless there is rather more evidence(web site 2) from this discussion of Indians in the UK, that 'hybridity' (maintaining aspects of both cultures) is more common in Britain!.

The greater evidence of a commitment to a hybrid Indian/Brtish identity amongst British based Indians is connected to
(i) commitment to Hindu religion and active belief in the values and norms of Hinduism but a negative attitude to the official leaders of the the religion
(2) a commitment to the principle of of arranged marriages with spouses from India!.
(3) commitment to British citizenship and to many of the institutions and forms of governance associated with it

Web site 3 is a review of the integration and assimilatiation of second generation Asian Americans and shows how most of this group shifted from an assimilationsist (completely committed to American culture) to a more integrationist (hybrid) sense of identity and values, as they met a wider group of other Asian Americans at college!.

Your point that overseas Indians are committed to forms of 'Indian tradtion' being rejected by those still living in their mother land fits into a more general phenomena: there is a lot of evidence that traditions are held more strongly by elderly overseas emigrants than by those, especially the newer generations, still living in their country of birth

Finally if you are talking about Muslim terrorism in the migrant communities of Western countries this is extract from a web site put out by the Hudson Institute (web site 4!.)which describes an attempt, based on research ,to answer this issue

'Political scientist Shamit Saggar recently noted that there were three factors causing isolation and potential radicalism amongst British Muslims!. First, the Muslim communities are characterized by patterns of social and economic exclusion; earnings are lower among Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities, and their children achieve less in school!. Second, these communities experience high levels of social isolation, particularly in the northern industrial towns!. These contribute to an inward-looking posture that is reluctant to promote interaction with the outside community!. Third, British Muslims have begun to embrace the ideology of victimhood, and a clear oppositional culture can be discerned!.
Professor Saggar notes that there is a lack of certainty about which levers can be pulled to counter these trends, and with what results!. The government has backed initiatives to increase the training of British-born Imams, thereby promoting a home-grown version of Islam, but he notes that there is no evidence that younger religious leaders are likely to be less influenced by radical ideology than their older foreign-born peers!. One option employed by the government has been to pressure Muslim leaders, and particularly the Muslim Council of Britain, to write to individual mosques reminding them of their responsibility to counter the teaching of violence or violent conspiracy!. He suggests that centrally-directed efforts should lead to reducing intolerance and that combined with tackling the three sets of obstacles to achievement, should provide the pragmatic answer to dealing with a potential “clash of civilizations” in Britain'Www@QuestionHome@Com