The Non Resident Indian
It's interesting how often people try to shut me up by calling me an NRI (Non Resident Indian). What does she know? She's an NRI. How can she talk about issues in India? She's an NRI. What right does an NRI have to talk about development in India when she sits in London choking over her Starbucks Mocha? What does she know about the Gaza strip when she's never been to the Middle East. (Except for that damn hopping flight that touches base in Dubai). So what if she's spent 97.57% of her life in India, the minute she finds herself in an non-Indian postcode - she's an NRI.
Even I have lived in India for a day, I would still have this right to speak about the country. Even if I have never stepped foot in Mexico, I have a right to be curious and to share my perception.
What is an NRI anyway? Someone who will never return? Someone who may return? Someone who sends remittances? Someone with a family name that sounds Desi?
Given the number of Indias within India - isn't everyone an NRI? Everyone is not a resident of one of the Indias. Even if you've spent 80 ripe years in India - can you claim to know every city, person, village, river, tree and monkey? So what are you - just because your IP says you are sitting in a corner of India - an RI? (Resident Indian?)
So India is off-bounds to an NRI, because she doesn't live there anymore (even if temporarily). UK should be out-of-bounds to me because I'm not "from" here. I shouldn't comment on the rest of the world - because well I haven't seen it. Do I have permission to look into my teacup and read the leaves then?
When people find it hard to argue with your ideas - they pick on your identity instead. And that really makes me laugh. Because then for sure - I know I am right.
(Note - Kamla has an excellent post on this issue.)
Even I have lived in India for a day, I would still have this right to speak about the country. Even if I have never stepped foot in Mexico, I have a right to be curious and to share my perception.
What is an NRI anyway? Someone who will never return? Someone who may return? Someone who sends remittances? Someone with a family name that sounds Desi?
Given the number of Indias within India - isn't everyone an NRI? Everyone is not a resident of one of the Indias. Even if you've spent 80 ripe years in India - can you claim to know every city, person, village, river, tree and monkey? So what are you - just because your IP says you are sitting in a corner of India - an RI? (Resident Indian?)
So India is off-bounds to an NRI, because she doesn't live there anymore (even if temporarily). UK should be out-of-bounds to me because I'm not "from" here. I shouldn't comment on the rest of the world - because well I haven't seen it. Do I have permission to look into my teacup and read the leaves then?
When people find it hard to argue with your ideas - they pick on your identity instead. And that really makes me laugh. Because then for sure - I know I am right.
(Note - Kamla has an excellent post on this issue.)
posted by neha vish at 12:46
46 Comments:
When people find it hard to argue with your ideas - they pick on your identity instead. And that really makes me laugh. Because then for sure - I know I am right.
I love that. :-)
Hey Neha that was a perfect post. I agree 100% with u. I am an NRI living in US and I love India as much as anyone else. I care abt india and am part of development happening in India. So i have every right to talk about issues in india. noone can take that away from me.
I think living outside of India gives us a much better perspective. We can put forward an opinion many cannot.
Take care. Enjoy.
I guess that this debate has been laid to rest by the GOI. In the new world, you can have stand with your feet in two countries. NRI or PIOs are Indians. Just that some Desis are jealous. But they needn't worry. The GOI will find ways to tax NRIS.
besides NRI there is this is another term
RNI(resident but not indians)
ppl who have apparently caught on to the wave californication :)
i guess such NRIs are still .... than "more english than the queen" RNI :D
.ashu
Man oh man. How I hate that term "NRI".
And because I am so full of it, I will even give you a link to a post I wrote sometime back in 2005.
krishna
great post neha!!! i completely agree with you...there's a certain hostility towards desis who live abroad...I dont know why..may be its jealousy for what they couldn't , or just insecurity
Nice post, toally offset by the stupid comment above. Chandni,
"Jealousy" or "insecurity" for not being an NRI ?! Being an NRI or a RI is not a qualification in itself. As I understand it, Neha's post is about the irrelevance of the terms when it comes to having a viewpoint. Its not about irreverance of either! I dont see where the words "jealousy" or "insecurity" fit in among equals. Attributing peurile reasons to others' reactions is a reflection of your own immaturity. As regards people being hostile towards you...maybe its more to do with you being yourself rather than you being an NRI.
Well said, so much for me, just 3 years out. Well that doesnt stop me from writing about India or wirting about the land I live in. I belive everyone has thier own freedom of speech on anything as long as it.. leads to a better somewhere.
Please bear with me for taking the unpopular side. Me an NRI too.
"So what if she's spent 97.57% of her life in India" - this at the age of 24 or at the time when you left ? You calculated it ?
Anyways, my two cents:
Honestly, we can talk. It's not the question of being right or wrong. No one can decide that for sure.
The opposition comes when NRI's sound heavily condescending, calling RIs as morons and idiots and terming whatever they have been doing unconsciously for years as Beastly - nothing short of an outsider,especially westener. This, when NRIs themselves put up with it while being insiders. NRIs new found experience is welcome,if presented in a desirable Indianised way. Copycat-experiences are generally seen with suspicion due to many reasons. Tough to replace.
When you are dealing with belief systems, a slow persuation rather than condescending is the right way, me thinks. An RI who shares the collective fate of India is justified in silencing an NRI because the latter has,in actuality, no stake in India's fate. He/she has already found the escape route. Whatever they do is out of emotion,attachment, and for their own identity sake. All are 100 percent voluntary. Not all can be doing it for the same reason. Thinking of it, what if a westernised NRI works for FBI or the Russian Intl.agency and evrything had a hidden meaning and purpose? You never know. An NRIs loyalties are questionable.
An RI can work for FBI too. But if found, his fate and NRIs fate may not be the same. An RI will be sharing the responsibility for what he/she is doing and preaching.
The greatest grudge against NRIs is that they have taken creme de la creme education for the most part by making use of the heavily subsidised institutes - pushing out the others in the competition. And, left India to work for some other country citing silly excuses like unemployment, no proper pay package, work condition, blah blah.(They are silly in a big picture view)
Simply put: There is shortage of food or no food situation in your home. Your siblings and parents are starving. They decided to lifted you up and put you on the neigbhour's house and they adopted you. Now, sitting in that house, you criticise the very people who were everything for you until just now. It's emotionally disturbing for your folks back home when your attitude is diabolical. They wanted to see you survive and look after the home. But you venture out and in the name of helping them, started calling them fools for what they did and what they do.
May be you are right. That's not the question here. Which direction is right, is destination-specific.
Changing the destination is very tough, for that is the vagary of life and involves human psyche which is very delicate.
That means your advices should be compaassionate and persuading, not condescending, lest it will surely create, if not anything, discontent and disappointment, at your behavior. Outsiders must SUGGEST, only insiders have the previlege of REVOLT. You are no longer an insider. An insider talking hostile is akin to a blacksheep.
Your destiny is different. It is in your hand. For them, there is no choice. They have bigger stake.
O My Goodness. I stop here.
An insider talking hostile is akin to a blacksheep.
That must be read as:
An INSIDER turned OUTSIDER talking hostile is akin to a blacksheep.
Premalatha: :)
Suds: An NRI may or may not care about India. That isn't my take on the situation. My question is simply this - If someone cannot deal with my argument, does calling me an NRI somehow round it off?
SloganMurugan: :)
.ashu: It doesn't matter who is more English. Really. That is irrelevant. I don't care if Kerala becomes California. That is for Kerala to determine, and I believe most people are intelligent enough to be allowed to take their own decisions.
Chandni: I don't think it's jealousy or insecurity. I would be jealous of them in turn. Resident Indians are living in one of the fastest growing economies and these are very interesting times for someone who wants to do something new. I think the "jealousy" factor is something the movies came up with in the 70s.
Anonymous: Spot On!
Nanyaar?: Yup. It is about the freedom of speech, and the right to have your viewpoint judged on its own merit, and not on the basis of your identity.
Your friend: Is it that RIs feel hostile towards NRIs because they perceive them as those cheated the country out of its resources? (Do we count Amartya Sen in this list?)
NRIs play a huge role in building Brand India. The diaspora also lobbies effectively in many countries. How are we going to put a monetary value on that which runs beyond remittances? That whole point about an RI and NRI working for some foreign organisation is a lot of bull. A person cheating a country (if you can call that cheating in the first place) does it because of one's situation. You're telling me everyone in India is working towards the greater good of the country?
So where is my content condascending? It is honest from my point of view. I am not going to give it a thick layer of salad dressing and be compassionate. I am not addressing a bunch of toddlers here. Adults can take honesty with a pinch of salt or a truckload of sugar. Their call.
But argue with the idea - is what I am saying. Understand my content - that is fine. But don't attempt to dismiss my intelligence as NRI talk.
I don't belive in the concept of blacksheep. It's too heavily bent on morals.
Identities by themselves are not inclusive, but they can be included through establishing connections. Given this whole mood - a South Indian shouldn't write about North India. A muslim shouldn't write on Hinduism.
PS - Please use your own website as the URL if you must use one.
oh and
km: Have read that post. Yes. I agree.
Neha, No ill feelings please. I am an NRI too. Just arguing with you. Thats all. ( becos I like you :-))
Is it that RIs feel hostile towards NRIs because they perceive them as those cheated the country out of its resources? (Do we count Amartya Sen in this list?)
Yes. I for one belive it for sure. I have already given the reason in my previous comment that they feeling hostile is justified.
-Even the great Indira Gandhi was alleged to have been influenced by KGB. True or false, who knows? What if Amartya Sen has done something more damaging than whatever he contributed? No one knows. The point is:The moment you choose not to share the destiny, your motives can be questioned
How are we going to put a monetary value on that which runs beyond remittances?
I have already said they are always incidental and voluntary. RIs can suspect the existence of other motives. Even in Modi issue, some invited him and some protested against him. Who should an RI believe as speaking for India's best interests?
That whole point about an RI and NRI working for some foreign organisation is a lot of bull. I am not going to give it a thick layer of salad dressing and be compassionate.
That's what I call wrong attitude. When I am making a decent discussion with elaborate stories, you simply dismiss it as bullshit(I hate that word in discussions). This is a small thing,yes, but when you talk about larger issue you cannot be so.
If you are not prepared to be compassionate why would you expect them to be focussed on what you want them to talk? Even if it is your blog, it is their opinion after all.
BTW, don't you think what is being said is dependent upon who say it?
I don't belive in the concept of blacksheep. It's too heavily bent on morals.
Fine. But I believe. Nations believe many people believe. RIs can question the motives of NRIs and suspect if it is a case of blacksheeping.
You're telling me everyone in India is working towards the greater good of the country?
May or May not be. There is a world of difference between saying/doing something from within and without. You are not accountable/going to live with whatever you are saying/doing about India. Whereas they have a stake in it. It is going to affect them.
Identities by themselves are not inclusive, but they can be included through establishing connections. How? your connection needs understaning whom you are talking about. That means you need to understand their "language". If write about North Indians or South Indians I need to respect them first. And persuade them through discussion. I cannot just call them names and want a discussion on it. Even if I say something I think good, They have a right to suspect my motive if they feel I am an outsider. BTW, there's a hell lot of difference between someone within Indian and someone without.
Some intense points and counter-points. My two cents (sorry - paise). Its' not really that very different if you are a "RI". I always manage to run into someone who has lived-longer/seen more sufferring/dealt with more poverty/seen more pain (the list goes on) and is therefore more qualified to have an opinion on India and its well being.
The funniest has to be when someone, appropriately dressed in a designer kurta, jeans and "jhola" quoted straight from UB40 to accuse me of "digging deep for clues on higher ground" because I [supposedly] had no idea how [bad] it is in the remote corners of India. This coming from someone who's idea of adventure is getting on to a "State Transport Bus". I guess you really cant avoid the morality brigade. Some of them know what they are talking about, some dont.
For the record, I went straight back to choking on my Barista Mocha. :-)
Can totally relate to your post :).
But ever since i became an NRI, i realized how different are the opinions of those who are abroad from those who are in India.
India is developing fast, and if you are outta, say delhi for a year, you don't know much about what's happening. Media almost always screw up things and present a skewed perspective :)
Actually, NRIs carry too much of India with them. And with today's technology (Internet, Sat. TV, etc,), most of them can stay stuck to India.
Thanks for this great post Neha. I am a little surprised that you find it 'interesting' instead of 'outrageous' that people use this sort of tactics in argument. But, your last paragraph made me go 'Bravo!'.
Calling someone an NRI is just one of many tactics used to make an opponent shut up. I dealt with some of them (including the one about NRI) in a difficult post that I felt I had to write last May. Well, that post is looong, and you may not want to read all of it. Let me just quote two paragraphs:
[Begin quote]
In the political/ideological realm, there are many words available to the left to muzzle their opponents: US stooge, Bush's lackey, on the CIA payroll, etc. In my opinion, the words 'subversive', 'antinationalist' and 'denigrator of Indian culture' used by some Indian right wing bloggers belong to the same category, and they are just barely below the ultimate weapon: 'unpatriotic'.
Irrespective of who uses them, all these words have the same effect in the debate, and that is to unfairly handicap the opponent by indicating (sometimes using code words) to the audience that the opponent's loyalty lies elsewhere, to unfairly deny the opponent the legitimacy to present his/her argument, and to unfairly imply that his/her argument should not be given the same weight and consideration as yours. In short, these words un-level the playing field, and that is unfair.
[End quote]
Sorry for taking up so much of real estate here. But, thanks so much for writing this post.
Thanks Abi. I never knew such debate was going on. Will read later.
Your Friend: Being honest doesn't mean one has ill feelings.
You are missing my point completely. The issue is not of me "being" something, but me being dismissed without being heard. Simple. When I was an RI - I was dimissed for being too young, being female, being SouthIndian, being a person with a different educational background, being middle class.
I believe compassion is another form of pity. I respect people and that is what I expect in return.
The context of a person largely determines what they say - but the absolute value of what they say should be determined on the basis of content. You can use the context to understand where that comes from, but not dismiss it without considering content.
What India? So if sitting in Delhi - ABC plots to nuke Madras - do you think that's different from doing it from Washington? The quid pro quo of any situations dies if one party assumes a moral superiority. Which is what happens in many discussions. NRIs debase RIs and vice verca. I have an issue with that. Period.
Motley Fool: Yup. That moral superiority halo that is gained through experience puts me off. At any given point in time no two people share the same knowledge base or experience. How do you value one more than the other?
It's like watching one of those movies on Bombay that romanticize poverty. Bugs me. So wear your designer kurtas and ride in ST buses, but don't tell the Motley Fool he's any less. :)
Amit: My point is that the difference in opinion exists within India as well. So why highlight the "supposed" difference between the RI and NRI without examining content?
SloganMurugan: True. :)
Abi: Thanks for the link. I remember reading that post actually. Thank you for quoting out of it. It adds a lot of perspective to what I said. My issue isn't necessarily about the notion of NRI. It's about the attack on identity. (Rooted in as you rightly point out - Loyalty).
In the same vein, I find that a lot stuff that is said by some bloggers is taken without the customary pinch of salt because it comes from them. I remember reading an interesting post on this issue.
NRI can also mean non reliable indian :-) jokes apart,,i totally agree with ur post..
Neha, thanks for linking to my post. You are right in saying, don't pull off the "identity" stunt, but try and argue about what I am saying. And it's natural that you are enraged. However, it is also not unnatural that people don't take views as objectively as we would like.
One problem I had mentioned in the post you've linked is the above one. But a more dangerous problem that I have talked about over there is that of "axioms". Axioms like "US is where all good research happens". I mentioned this because somewhere above I read about the need to be "objective". True. One has to be objective and dispassionate. One has to be critical if required whether you are choking over a Starbucks Mocha in London, or you are drinking coffee in Janata Hotel. While objectivity is necessary, it is not sufficient. One's objectivity has to be grounded in reality, and just based on faulty axioms and folklore. For that to happen we got to move beyond conventional and, more often than not, trite ideas like "everyone has a right to a better life. So, don't complain". Not that I am disputing the idea per se, but the logic behind such conventional arguments can be argued against and defeated. Not based on another set of trite ideas like "morality" "patriotism" etc., but on sound reasoning. That is because a lot of such "objective" ideas are short sighted. And more often than not we encounter only such views. And a lot of people get irritated, for various reasons. Some attack a view, and some attack the person who holds the view.
Take this as a general comment. I know I have stretched it. But I also hope you wont consider my lengthy rant to be totally off topic. :)
Oops... mistake. I meant "One's objectivity has to be grounded in reality, and *not* just based on faulty axioms and folklore". Had missed the "not".
The issue is not of me "being" something, but me being dismissed without being heard. Simple.
~ Come on, You are no longer accountable to anyone in India. Why should they give respect to your words, especially when they feel it is displeasing to them. If at all somebody does hear you, It is their respect for you and self-interests. Period.
What India? So if sitting in Delhi - ABC plots to nuke Madras - do you think that's different from doing it from Washington?
Absolutely. You got the point.
Indira Gandhi's alleged connection with KGB haunts her grand children even today. But, the masterminds behind Mumbai blasts(NRIs) are still at large. Inspite of the government's awareness about where they are, they simply are beyond the reach.
It is your concern to prove your loyalty. Otherwise, you are as good as an alien. Giving respect or otherwise to the opinion of an alien is their prerogative.
I believe compassion is another form of pity.
Fine. They may believe that anything lacking compassion is rude snobbery connoiseurness that needs little respect.
but the absolute value of what they say should be determined on the basis of content
No value is absolute. Values are always subjective.
When I was an RI - I was dimissed for being too young, being female, being SouthIndian, being a person with a different educational background, being middle class
May be, I am afraid, you were always talking about something as if "having found the truth" when in reality you were not even part of it,yet.
Ankur: Wasn't that a line in some Sanjay Dutt movie?
Sanket: I guess absolutes and values like patriotism are too "open" to subjectivity which is why they cannot be the base for an "understanding". I understand that I am a product of my context. But is the other person really entirely capable of understanding my context at all?
The problem is not when people try to contextualize opinion, but judge it on the basis of the context. And to me - there are two very different things. Reality is neither constant nor a 2D level playing field. Each one of us has his or her own reality to deal with and live within. :)
Your Friend: Given that I am Indian Citizen with an Indian passport in foreign land - I would say I am pretty much at the mercy of GOI. But that is besides the point. At any given point in time - you are only as accountable as you want yourself to be.
I definitely didn't get your point. Your understanding of culture and identity seems to rest entirely upon nationality. Mine doesn't. Since the variables that we use in this conversation are defined so differently - the dialogue will not make sense.
If anything - I reject the notion of Truth. Leave along finding it! Period.
No value is absolute. Values are always subjective.
I think I have started getting "Your friend"'s point.
If you really have an issue with that, go and do something about understanding India...volunteer with CRY / Pratham insted of debating patriotism...Believe me they could do with all the help they can get, intellectual, financial, physical! Want to make your mark? Make a difference!
Neha, well written and your last paragraph got it in one.
Your friend, I find it amazing that you find it so easy to categorise people as "insiders" and "outsiders," simply based on where they live.
I definitely didn't get your point. Your understanding of culture and identity seems to rest entirely upon nationality. Mine doesn't. Since the variables that we use in this conversation are defined so differently.
Culture ? Identity ? Are we not talking about NRI labelling/bashing ?
Neha: I guess you are right about some of those notions being too "open". And, no, one cannot possibly understand another's context. IMO, it's not strictly necessary either. (Actually I didn't understand why the first paragraph of your comment was directed towards me. Am I missing something?)
The problem is not when people try to contextualize opinion, but judge it on the basis of the context. Again, here, are we both saying the same thing using different terms, or..? An example should help me. And may I rephrase your reality statement? Each one of us has his or her own existence to deal with and exist within. There is a reality that is independent of our existence. Plus each one has his or her own perception of reality.
Most probably you will reject it. Doesn't matter. We can still see eye in eye. At least as far as this discussion is concerned ;).
Hi Mumbaigirl,
I beleive where we live does make a lot of difference.
My past is from India, I agree and I would want people to let me talk about india, because that is what made me into what/who I am today. But, Where I live definitely has lot to do with my present tense and future tenses. Economy, law, tax, policies, community, culture , values and everything has a different meaning and different perspective according where I live. some of the things that are relevant and valid in inda are not relevant and / or valid in UK. so, that changes the "value"/weightage I assign to that attribute. life is a multilayered solution, each layer with attributes with weightages assigned to them. they definitely differ.
Coming back to Neha's point, when someone is discussing certain issue, rejecting/accepting someone's take on the issue simply based on their geographical location/identity doesn't look acceptable to me, however influenced/changed our views are because of our relocation/whatever-identity.
Prema madam, atleast neengalaavadhu varattu vaadham illaama oru paathiyaavadhu purinjikitteengale santhosam.
anyway, naan idhoda mudichikiran. (Yes, I am a Tamilian too) :-))
Your friend,
ivvalavu pesinathukkapuram unga per, ninga yaarunnu solaliye, after all this discussion is about understanding things by attributing value to who is saying it. lol. ninga mattum naan yaarunnu therinju argue panriinga, athe laxury enakku ninga kodukkaliye.
Mumbaigirl is going to kill me now. I honestly apologise for my tamil talk. Couldn't resist. lol.
Prema madam, Thanks. Unga reply padichittu, I had a hearty laugh.
Hmm...enna solradhu...My name is...(not billa)...RaajK
my blog, ippathaan thoor vaarum pani nadanthikittu irukku...anything else?
I thought we might have come across each other before, so I wanted to find out who you are. I do not know how you know me, but I think I have come across you in Dubukku's blog.
:-)
Nice to know you.
I think that is all we should talk about "our alavalaaval", as Neha has serious topics going on here.
:-)
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
The leading piece by the author of this blog appears to have triggered an impassioned exchange on views which are not entirely relevant to the central point.
Why should someone be assailed for expressing certain views, merely on the basis of residency ? you could disagree with those views or feel that the person is not competent to write because that person has lived outside the country. but that argument is equally compelling for someone living in india as well. walking away from a person who is talking is not the same as hollering at that person in an attempt to silence her.
Most of the comments were a digression from the central point, in my opinion. the elaborate discussion on the notion of an NRI is incongruous in this context.
Hi RaajK,
Please do mail me if you like (premalatha_balan[@]yahoo[.]co[.]uk). Hope you didn't take my previous comment wrong. I didn't want to clutter Neha's blog that is all.
Premalatha,
Check your blog.
NRI can sometimes imply "Not respect Indian"
With current information and mass communication, all indians can know everything about India.
A couple of months before Swades was released, it was heartening to read in India today magazine that many NRIs were actually helping India the way it was showin in the movie
Ah, I see you have suffered from a good ole fashioned 'Ad Hominem' attack. And as you rightly surmise, it shows that there were no holes to be poked in your content, and so the person attacked you personally.
Half in half out, time passes and makes you an alien in places you have been before.
I'm just an alien. And I'm a NRHIDFIFBTTTE: Non Resident Half Indian Descended From Immigrated ForeBears Thanks To The English. ;-)
As: So a person who volunteers understands India??
MumbaiGirl: He/She has left out the fencesitters. :)
Sanket: The first paragraph was a reminder to myself that "understanding" is often futile.
Premalatha: Of course our contexts determine us. That's a given. I think MumbaiGirl was talking about the differenciation. Just because two people shift from Mumbai to London doesn't make their context the same .. because there are too many variables.
Anand: Thank you!
Hiren Shah: I don't think NRIs need to help India at all. The way things go. I wish Swades understood that SRK needn't have been from outside the country at all. He could be from the same community. Catharsis needn't be catalysed from outside.
Gaurav: :)
Taran: Quite a bias there! Shouldn't it be NRHIDFIFBTTTB? (English or British??) :))
Nah, it needed a 3rd vowel or it would look like it was Russian. Or Vogon.
When in confrontation by use of words, naming the device in use, disables it. Very few devices are impervious to this - 'ad hominem' is not one of those.
- Rosh
Good post.
I am conducting a global random survey on "What make you feel proud of India: perceptions of NRIs from around the world" I have a questionnaire to be fill in by the NRIs. If any one who posted their comments here, is interested to participate in this survey, please email me so that I can send the questionnaire. The deadline for the return of this questionnaire is Oct 25, 2006.
Thanks
Dr. P.L. Joshi Professor Bahrain
email: acadjoshi.com
www.acadjoshi.com
Post a Comment
This post is linked here:
Create a Link
<< Home