One of the benefits of the e-governance initiatives that India is attempting to accomplish is the refuction in corruption.
In "Being Indian" Varma claims that it is the acceptance of corruption which makes Indians unique from other areas of the world. "Corruption is, of course, not unique to India. What is unique is its acceptance..." He continues on and says "An act is right if it yields the desired end; it is wrond if it does not." From what I see, I have a hard time believing that India is unique in anything involving corruption.
Varma is basically saying that in an Indian's mindset, if corruption produces a desired end, then it is correct. They basically justify their actions. However, I have a hard time believing that they dont know that they are doing wrong. Only the most hardened people can do wrong and feel no ill effects. I believe that it isn't accepted, it is only viewed as necessary from one mindset to get something done. If the thing could get done another way, it would. Saying corruption is accepted is saying that if given a choice of doing something a corrupt way, or an uncorrupt way, and both ways will succeed, then Indians would have no qualms choosing the corrupt way.
However, Indians do have qualms with the corrupt way. Why else is there such a public outcry against corruption? Why else would e-governance have such a backing because it would help eradicate corruption?
1 comment:
This is an exceptionally well-written and thoughtful set of comments and questions. Unlike the other students blogs (which talked a lot about the India experiences and sometimes forgot to link it to the readings), your blog seemed to focus on the readings and did little to relate it to your experiences during the trip. It almost could have been written from the readings without making the trip.
Very intelligent and thoughtful narrative throughout this blog. I really think you should research some of the questions you raised and follow through on trying to answer the questions. Outstanding!
Post a Comment