Cultural imo. Comparing similar conditions in SE Asia, the communal sense is stronger there. India, despite being a collectivist society, there is this weird quality where people wear bending rules as a badge of honour. Bragging about how you "beat the system" is often met with adulation which in many other cultures you wouldn't dare openly talk about.
It's actually quite similar for most in the Philippines. Yeah, there are some smaller cliques or sub-groups where this is frowned upon, but it is mostly also a "badge of honour".
I don't think that's as different as you think with many many other cultures.
In Eastern South Asia and the American South, You hear similar stuff all the time.
In the American Northeast, its still there but in finance related terminology.
For sure, but there different degrees of behaviour. Individuals everywhere are ultimately driven by a survival-of-the-fittest instinct, but some cultures do a better job of creating a negative pressure in the interest of collective benefit. The clearest way this manifests is in the queue system, where some places are better able to queue up when a need arises and some places absolutely cannot.
Culture is mostly generational habits, learnings, hacks etc. Poverty and scarcity for generations could scar people into adopting certain habits as a way to survive; and it can be eradicated if the causal conditions go away and others take its place.
The observations in this article are useful, but the analysis is not as much.
1. It's silly to talk about "India"'s culture. The cultural differences between Bangalore and New Delhi are as great or greater than any 2 nations in Europe.
2. India's formal institutions are terrible. The author seems to confuse the construction of infrastructure with the establishment of institutions. The formal institutions are the same or maybe even worse than they were pre-Modi, with the only caveat being that India has taken huge leaps digitally (India is at least 1-2 decades ahead of where the US is in terms of digital identity, digital commerce, etc) which might give the impression that the formal institutions have improved, when in reality the formal institutions are as poor as they were, but some of their terribleness is now constrained by technology.
3. The indian "informal institutions" or "culture" are largely a response to the poor formal institutions. The author asks why the "West" is able to follow traffic speed limits whereas India is not, ignoring the fact that in the US, for example, with the reduction in enforcement during and following the pandemic, speeding in the US has shot through the roof. Jumping red lights has also increased dramatically. The reason Indians don't follow traffic rules is the same as everyone else. A lack of enforcement.
Now, it's possible that after severe enforcement for an extended period of time the formal institutional value will modify culture enough that even if the enforcement is rolled back traffic speeds would continue to be followed, but India has never experienced that.
Look at the Indian neighborhood (Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar), all sharing similar peoples, culture, high populations/inequality/chaos are all in deep financial trouble and are politically unstable.
Anyone who has visited, would think India has all the ingredients to land up in a similar state.
But the big diff with the neighborhood is the sheer Size of the country, and the really wide range of economic activity in different parts of the country.
Its what we see in Nature, where there is as much chaos and incomprehensible stuff happening as there is in India. If you have a Large ecosystem, lots of different species and a lot of genetic variety, the better such systems handle constant change and unpredictable shocks.
And this feels like what has happened in India. One corner is imploding, while another corner becomes a leading global center of Leather Science or Jewellery Design. And this saves them from burning down like the neighborhood because they have more buffer.
Depending on which corner you are sitting in, the view of what is possible in India changes drastically.
Another thing I have come to recognise is the sheer population density that makes everything the way they are.
I won’t compare Indian city(Chennai where I was born) with most cities in US or most cities in Europe because they pale in comparison for people density. Just a wild comparison- take the touristy chaos of New York City - now, you see the pattern emerge on what happens if density gets higher - people stop following the rules, trash outside the bins, people becoming more self-centered and out for themselves, on guard for burglars, traffic chaos.. you get the point. It’s as if India is NYC on steroids _everywhere_.
When you have a 8 lane highway for the density of Europe and the US, sure following the rules is _easier_ and will become cultural over time. When you constantly have to fight for resources, it is the other way around. People get used to not following the rules because that is the only known way to get it to work.
The informal culture described in the article is massively underrated, or at least, the opposite is overrated.
I'm from the (highly formal, rules-based) UK, but have lived most of my adult life in places with strong informal cultures. I find home incredibly rigid, inflexible and stifled compared to a lot of other places I've lived. So much "computer says no" and "not worth my job" in every interaction, incredible precision and planning required for the most basic things.
I'd stress this isn't necessarily just a government thing, there's a culture of unhelpfulness, restrictions imposed by insurance policies, a lack of communal responsibility, rent-seeking behaviors in privatised public space.
Not saying the opposite is necessarily better, but there are different modes of being outside our Western norms. When you get your head around the way things work, things can often be a hell of a lot easier day to day.
I just got back from a trip to India (I'm European), and it's a lot safer than you would expect. I'd say in general there is less crime and people are more honest than if you go to some tourist areas in Europe - say the center of Milan. Even taxi drivers gave us local prices (we stayed with locals so asked them).
The only thing to me that's a bit crazy is the roads. My friend offered me a newspaper to read and the headlines were about a bus crash that killed a bunch of people (we were getting a bus that night). From what I understand, if there is an accident where someone gets injured, it's quite common for the other party to just drive off and leave them - which as a European is basically unheard of, unless someone is DUI and doesn't realise.
I don’t want to discount your experience but I don’t think you can really judge safety by going somewhere. If I went to the US, what’s the probability of witnessing a shooting? What does that tell me about the safety there (specifically regarding gun deaths), relative to where I come from (Germany)? Just because I don’t personally witness anything doesn’t mean I would classify it as safe, because even unsafe countries probably aren’t that dangerous that most visitors are personally affected (unless you’re going somewhere really crazy like active warzones).
It's also very regional-- a lot of the sensational sexual assault cases are in the more economically-downwards states. Big metropolitan cities rarely have the heinous crimes we're so used to seeing in the Western world.
Comparing statistics like this between countries isn’t as easy as comparing the numbers though, the ratio of registered cases can vary and definitions of crimes can also be different.
Right, I actually wanted to say that India might actually be worse than the stats show, not that the UK is actually worse than India as claimed. Maybe it’s bias but I trust UK stats more than Indian stats.
A lot of it is automated and hand greasing is avoided, you would pay this online. This may be dramatically different in other states of India
Degree of politeness varies across states as well, Its a high tolerant society overall.
Places like Singapore are Aviation hubs (Hub-Spoke airline flights) , so someone making fun of BIAL being not at its standard is not even right (In terms of seating or capacity etc.). It is aesthetic showcasing a lot of local state culture (you will find it in a lot of airports). Again, you will not believe the cross section here, the Airport in Cochin is all sustainable through Solar and is Carbon negative ( one of the few in the world ).
Living in India is not as comparable as what it is in the West (or no where as safe as places like Japan), but then again , cultural shifts take generations , and so we hope :)
When traveling its always a great questions of chicken and then egg which came first culture to make formal systems or formal systems make the culture. Delhi is a great example of this and gives plenty of food for thought.
Kinda interesting to see this sort of "the grass is greener" type thinking. Strong institutions are a big juicy target for a broad spectrum of people and groups with self interest who will try to further those interests at the expense of everybody else. Given too long without serious negative consequences or given too long with blind buy-in from the population institutions often go down absurd paths that are not in the medium or long term best interests of just about anybody. There's very much a balance to be struck.
I personally think that by being very tepid about building strong institutions India is going to avoid a lot of expensive blunders because the lack of buy in curtails the ability of the institutions it does have to do dumb things or at least to do them thoroughly in the same way that a (smart) king who's kingdom is facing external threats doesn't usually kneecap the home front with bad policy.
I’m kind of intrigued that this came up on the homepage. I read it yesterday and had earmarked it to share here on HN. Then, I realized the topic is more of a convex view from the perspective of somebody with their own opinions.
While reading the article, I chuckled and laughed aloud at the ground truth, but it was written with a lighter perspective and good faith in things that are in India.
India is a complex amalgamation of so many different things thrown in. It is not just sides of a coin or something like that — it is the living beauty of the chaos of the chaos, with lots of serenity in various pockets and facades of life.
With this specific “negotiations” topic, I believe there is a missing angle, and I don’t know what term would suffice. But think like this: Watch out and forgive my small mistakes and naivete, and I will do the same when I see you doing it.
> With this specific “negotiations” topic, I believe there is a missing angle, and I don’t know what term would suffice. But think like this: Watch out and forgive my small mistakes and naivete, and I will do the same when I see you doing it.
I second this. Regardless of how it is portrayed in the media, India is a high tolerance society. Most people would forgive mistakes and naivety.
Some truth here though saying Bangalore airport (BLR) is on par with Singapore airport (SIN) is laughable.
A little stick is what India needs. People doing stuff like driving their motorcycle on the footpath aka sidewalk, will stop doing it if you offer just a touch of resistance and just stand there. It isn’t the US where you have small but real chance of being shot (at least in southern India, bihar etc might be exception)
Same with jumping the que, calling people out generally does the trick.
Some problems are more complex but a little more stick in India would make some solid improvements in everyday life.
The new Bangalore T2 terminal is designed for grand-standing and showing off, and not for passenger comfort.
Its biggest flaw is noticeable, even in the photo on the article - there’s very little seating and only large open spaces (often with lots of greenery and woodwork). The net result is that you get the same sight as every Indian railway station - passengers sitting on the floor.
One thing that stuck out to me in this article that the author mentioned is that India is safe. Having lived there for a large part of my early life and having travelled to all 28 (probably 29 now?) states over time, I found this to be very true. What makes India so safe amidst all the poverty and relative chaos?
But it must also be said that in the last decade the Politicians/Bureaucrats seem to have gotten their act together and things have actually improved though there is still a long way to go. As somebody who grew up in the 70s/80s and joined the workforce in the 90s things are far far better then what they were in all parameters. Given India's history/diversity/democracy there will always be problems but remember; "A rising tide lifts all boats".
PS : While the Politicians/Bureaucrats have been the curse of India, the Scientists/Engineers/Doctors are the ones who have kept its flag flying high. For an account in their own words see the two-volume The Mind of an Engineer by Purnendu Ghosh et al. and published by Springer.
Vendors expect customer to haggle, so they inflate sometimes as high as 100%.
Customers know vendors inflate, so they start haggling right away.
vendors get to sold at a desired price, buyer walks away thinking, they got a deal.
kids try to negotiate their punishments, i negotiated a bribe with a traffic cop once.
When haggling is expected and one party doesn't engage, the other party gets frustrated and try to walk away.
There are some pockets of activities where no-haggling is preferred choice.
Like branded goods (clothes, travel, automobile), high end real estate. people who are not good at negotiations prefer these options.
I purchased a house from a builder, who is notorious for not engaging in negotiations. I was happy with purchase because i know i got same deal as everyone else and did not lose anything.
I would say the real situation is uglier:
- Driving at times has the element of game of chicken. Both parties begin with aggression and then someone (or both) gives in.
- Lot of scamming everywhere. You think twice, thrice before you make a move, especially if involves money.
- Give an inch, take a yard is the norm.
- If a rule can be bent, it will be bent. Everything ends up in brinkmanship.
(Lived in India for most of my life, but has worked in multiple countries in Europe and Asia and have visited the US)
Do you think it's cultural or just a poverty thing?
Cultural imo. Comparing similar conditions in SE Asia, the communal sense is stronger there. India, despite being a collectivist society, there is this weird quality where people wear bending rules as a badge of honour. Bragging about how you "beat the system" is often met with adulation which in many other cultures you wouldn't dare openly talk about.
> people wear bending rules as a badge of honour
It's actually quite similar for most in the Philippines. Yeah, there are some smaller cliques or sub-groups where this is frowned upon, but it is mostly also a "badge of honour".
I don't think that's as different as you think with many many other cultures. In Eastern South Asia and the American South, You hear similar stuff all the time.
In the American Northeast, its still there but in finance related terminology.
For sure, but there different degrees of behaviour. Individuals everywhere are ultimately driven by a survival-of-the-fittest instinct, but some cultures do a better job of creating a negative pressure in the interest of collective benefit. The clearest way this manifests is in the queue system, where some places are better able to queue up when a need arises and some places absolutely cannot.
Well breaking the rules in a usually oppressive society is to be expected.
- Vedic to pre-Islamic era - get oppressed by rajas and brahmins based on caste.
- Sultanate and Mughal era - get oppressed by Mughals, Afghans, Turkomans, Persians, etc.
- Colonial era - get oppressed by the British and their English-educated/paid lackeys
- Modern era - get oppressed by police and Sarkari government babus
Oppressing other peoples seems to be a part of Indian society, so any reversal of the roles should always be celebrated imo.
Culture is mostly generational habits, learnings, hacks etc. Poverty and scarcity for generations could scar people into adopting certain habits as a way to survive; and it can be eradicated if the causal conditions go away and others take its place.
The observations in this article are useful, but the analysis is not as much.
1. It's silly to talk about "India"'s culture. The cultural differences between Bangalore and New Delhi are as great or greater than any 2 nations in Europe. 2. India's formal institutions are terrible. The author seems to confuse the construction of infrastructure with the establishment of institutions. The formal institutions are the same or maybe even worse than they were pre-Modi, with the only caveat being that India has taken huge leaps digitally (India is at least 1-2 decades ahead of where the US is in terms of digital identity, digital commerce, etc) which might give the impression that the formal institutions have improved, when in reality the formal institutions are as poor as they were, but some of their terribleness is now constrained by technology. 3. The indian "informal institutions" or "culture" are largely a response to the poor formal institutions. The author asks why the "West" is able to follow traffic speed limits whereas India is not, ignoring the fact that in the US, for example, with the reduction in enforcement during and following the pandemic, speeding in the US has shot through the roof. Jumping red lights has also increased dramatically. The reason Indians don't follow traffic rules is the same as everyone else. A lack of enforcement.
Now, it's possible that after severe enforcement for an extended period of time the formal institutional value will modify culture enough that even if the enforcement is rolled back traffic speeds would continue to be followed, but India has never experienced that.
Look at the Indian neighborhood (Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar), all sharing similar peoples, culture, high populations/inequality/chaos are all in deep financial trouble and are politically unstable.
Anyone who has visited, would think India has all the ingredients to land up in a similar state.
But the big diff with the neighborhood is the sheer Size of the country, and the really wide range of economic activity in different parts of the country.
Its what we see in Nature, where there is as much chaos and incomprehensible stuff happening as there is in India. If you have a Large ecosystem, lots of different species and a lot of genetic variety, the better such systems handle constant change and unpredictable shocks.
And this feels like what has happened in India. One corner is imploding, while another corner becomes a leading global center of Leather Science or Jewellery Design. And this saves them from burning down like the neighborhood because they have more buffer.
Depending on which corner you are sitting in, the view of what is possible in India changes drastically.
Another thing I have come to recognise is the sheer population density that makes everything the way they are.
I won’t compare Indian city(Chennai where I was born) with most cities in US or most cities in Europe because they pale in comparison for people density. Just a wild comparison- take the touristy chaos of New York City - now, you see the pattern emerge on what happens if density gets higher - people stop following the rules, trash outside the bins, people becoming more self-centered and out for themselves, on guard for burglars, traffic chaos.. you get the point. It’s as if India is NYC on steroids _everywhere_.
When you have a 8 lane highway for the density of Europe and the US, sure following the rules is _easier_ and will become cultural over time. When you constantly have to fight for resources, it is the other way around. People get used to not following the rules because that is the only known way to get it to work.
It’s not straightforward as one can think..
Did you know that Netherlands has about the same population density as India?
https://countryeconomy.com/countries/compare/netherlands/ind...
Density within cities, and a countries' population density are not comparable
Singapore is 20x denser than India, and the entire country is just the city.
Singapore's police is omnipresent, powerful and "less corrupted" than its Indian counterpart.
It also seems to me that everyone in multi-ethnic Singapore tries hard to avoid any provocation, maybe because it wreak havoc during the 1960's.
Not that I appreciate a high population density or large population... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_Kohr#The_Breakdown_of_...
India is just poorer. Corruption is cheaper for the public than higher pay for cops. same reason irs doesn’t enforce taxes on tips in America.
The informal culture described in the article is massively underrated, or at least, the opposite is overrated.
I'm from the (highly formal, rules-based) UK, but have lived most of my adult life in places with strong informal cultures. I find home incredibly rigid, inflexible and stifled compared to a lot of other places I've lived. So much "computer says no" and "not worth my job" in every interaction, incredible precision and planning required for the most basic things.
I'd stress this isn't necessarily just a government thing, there's a culture of unhelpfulness, restrictions imposed by insurance policies, a lack of communal responsibility, rent-seeking behaviors in privatised public space.
Not saying the opposite is necessarily better, but there are different modes of being outside our Western norms. When you get your head around the way things work, things can often be a hell of a lot easier day to day.
> And it’s safe, which a country without a strong legal safety net and a lot of poverty arguably shouldn’t be. There’s no real urban crime.
Interesting, my outside view without any concrete data was that India is relatively unsafe.
I just got back from a trip to India (I'm European), and it's a lot safer than you would expect. I'd say in general there is less crime and people are more honest than if you go to some tourist areas in Europe - say the center of Milan. Even taxi drivers gave us local prices (we stayed with locals so asked them).
The only thing to me that's a bit crazy is the roads. My friend offered me a newspaper to read and the headlines were about a bus crash that killed a bunch of people (we were getting a bus that night). From what I understand, if there is an accident where someone gets injured, it's quite common for the other party to just drive off and leave them - which as a European is basically unheard of, unless someone is DUI and doesn't realise.
I don’t want to discount your experience but I don’t think you can really judge safety by going somewhere. If I went to the US, what’s the probability of witnessing a shooting? What does that tell me about the safety there (specifically regarding gun deaths), relative to where I come from (Germany)? Just because I don’t personally witness anything doesn’t mean I would classify it as safe, because even unsafe countries probably aren’t that dangerous that most visitors are personally affected (unless you’re going somewhere really crazy like active warzones).
It's also very regional-- a lot of the sensational sexual assault cases are in the more economically-downwards states. Big metropolitan cities rarely have the heinous crimes we're so used to seeing in the Western world.
It is less safe for women than men unfortunately.
There is urban crime, but it’s petty.
Once a mob forms the victim of the crime usually ends up defending the pickpocket from a thrashing.
Rarely is there knife or gun violence as is reported from the UK or the US.
I have checked out stats and violent crime specifically is higher in India. UK has slightly more murders. Overall, they are very comparable https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/India/Unit...
Comparing statistics like this between countries isn’t as easy as comparing the numbers though, the ratio of registered cases can vary and definitions of crimes can also be different.
Sure, it is not exact. But rhe claim was literally India has almost no violence while UK has.
Even if this stat is inaccurate, it still shows India having plenty of violence and makes the claim dubious.
Right, I actually wanted to say that India might actually be worse than the stats show, not that the UK is actually worse than India as claimed. Maybe it’s bias but I trust UK stats more than Indian stats.
Again a lot of this varies state by state. Traffic is most talked about, a lot of this is state regulated (not federal)
In my home state of Kerala, traffic violations on major roads are now enforced through AI cameras (https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/kerala/within-a-year-...)
A lot of it is automated and hand greasing is avoided, you would pay this online. This may be dramatically different in other states of India
Degree of politeness varies across states as well, Its a high tolerant society overall.
Places like Singapore are Aviation hubs (Hub-Spoke airline flights) , so someone making fun of BIAL being not at its standard is not even right (In terms of seating or capacity etc.). It is aesthetic showcasing a lot of local state culture (you will find it in a lot of airports). Again, you will not believe the cross section here, the Airport in Cochin is all sustainable through Solar and is Carbon negative ( one of the few in the world ).
Living in India is not as comparable as what it is in the West (or no where as safe as places like Japan), but then again , cultural shifts take generations , and so we hope :)
When traveling its always a great questions of chicken and then egg which came first culture to make formal systems or formal systems make the culture. Delhi is a great example of this and gives plenty of food for thought.
Kinda interesting to see this sort of "the grass is greener" type thinking. Strong institutions are a big juicy target for a broad spectrum of people and groups with self interest who will try to further those interests at the expense of everybody else. Given too long without serious negative consequences or given too long with blind buy-in from the population institutions often go down absurd paths that are not in the medium or long term best interests of just about anybody. There's very much a balance to be struck.
I personally think that by being very tepid about building strong institutions India is going to avoid a lot of expensive blunders because the lack of buy in curtails the ability of the institutions it does have to do dumb things or at least to do them thoroughly in the same way that a (smart) king who's kingdom is facing external threats doesn't usually kneecap the home front with bad policy.
I’m kind of intrigued that this came up on the homepage. I read it yesterday and had earmarked it to share here on HN. Then, I realized the topic is more of a convex view from the perspective of somebody with their own opinions.
While reading the article, I chuckled and laughed aloud at the ground truth, but it was written with a lighter perspective and good faith in things that are in India.
India is a complex amalgamation of so many different things thrown in. It is not just sides of a coin or something like that — it is the living beauty of the chaos of the chaos, with lots of serenity in various pockets and facades of life.
With this specific “negotiations” topic, I believe there is a missing angle, and I don’t know what term would suffice. But think like this: Watch out and forgive my small mistakes and naivete, and I will do the same when I see you doing it.
> With this specific “negotiations” topic, I believe there is a missing angle, and I don’t know what term would suffice. But think like this: Watch out and forgive my small mistakes and naivete, and I will do the same when I see you doing it.
I second this. Regardless of how it is portrayed in the media, India is a high tolerance society. Most people would forgive mistakes and naivety.
Some truth here though saying Bangalore airport (BLR) is on par with Singapore airport (SIN) is laughable.
A little stick is what India needs. People doing stuff like driving their motorcycle on the footpath aka sidewalk, will stop doing it if you offer just a touch of resistance and just stand there. It isn’t the US where you have small but real chance of being shot (at least in southern India, bihar etc might be exception)
Same with jumping the que, calling people out generally does the trick.
Some problems are more complex but a little more stick in India would make some solid improvements in everyday life.
The new Bangalore T2 terminal is designed for grand-standing and showing off, and not for passenger comfort.
Its biggest flaw is noticeable, even in the photo on the article - there’s very little seating and only large open spaces (often with lots of greenery and woodwork). The net result is that you get the same sight as every Indian railway station - passengers sitting on the floor.
One thing that stuck out to me in this article that the author mentioned is that India is safe. Having lived there for a large part of my early life and having travelled to all 28 (probably 29 now?) states over time, I found this to be very true. What makes India so safe amidst all the poverty and relative chaos?
Funny article but with some grain of truth to it.
But it must also be said that in the last decade the Politicians/Bureaucrats seem to have gotten their act together and things have actually improved though there is still a long way to go. As somebody who grew up in the 70s/80s and joined the workforce in the 90s things are far far better then what they were in all parameters. Given India's history/diversity/democracy there will always be problems but remember; "A rising tide lifts all boats".
PS : While the Politicians/Bureaucrats have been the curse of India, the Scientists/Engineers/Doctors are the ones who have kept its flag flying high. For an account in their own words see the two-volume The Mind of an Engineer by Purnendu Ghosh et al. and published by Springer.
Haggling is expected in some areas.
Vendors expect customer to haggle, so they inflate sometimes as high as 100%. Customers know vendors inflate, so they start haggling right away. vendors get to sold at a desired price, buyer walks away thinking, they got a deal.
kids try to negotiate their punishments, i negotiated a bribe with a traffic cop once.
When haggling is expected and one party doesn't engage, the other party gets frustrated and try to walk away.
There are some pockets of activities where no-haggling is preferred choice. Like branded goods (clothes, travel, automobile), high end real estate. people who are not good at negotiations prefer these options.
I purchased a house from a builder, who is notorious for not engaging in negotiations. I was happy with purchase because i know i got same deal as everyone else and did not lose anything.
If all you're haggling about is price, then that's not really much of a negotiation.