I GET HATE MAILS

WHY WE SEND HATE MAILS?


If a shopkeeper tells you that he does not have the thing you are looking for but will make it available to you in a few hours what he means is that you may try after 2 days. If he tells you that he will get it in two days it means you ought to revisit his shop after two weeks. If he tells you that the goods will arrive ‘definitely’ after 15 days it means he has no plans to get it for you.
I leave it to you to try and figure out who said this about our way of dealing with requests. But suffice it to say that this is an aspect of not just Indian but even Asian behaviour. We find it difficult to be straightforward in replying to others for fear that we may be seen as rude.
What’s wrong with this? some may argue .True we ought not to be rude but look at this way. Are we not misleading the other guy by not being honest with him regarding our inability to deliver what he is seeking? Do we not believe in honesty in our dealings? Is it not possible to be honest AND polite?
The argument about not being rude is really not convincing since we do not consistently exhibit that trait in our other dealings where politeness is required.
I have written many articles on a range of subjects some of which may be unpalatable to many .That to my mind is exactly what we need –the vibrant market place of ideas, the clash of alternative viewpoints .Did I say ‘clash”? Maybe that’s where I err .It is the responses from some people to my articles that leads me to believe that Indians of the sort who reply to me are also strong believers in clash but sadly of a different sort. They have a right –indeed a duty--- to highlight where I may be wrong, but do the replies have to take a near sinister personal turn?
Here is one response to my article
.
He seems to be an immatured guy and probably
writes at the instance of some body.
One may rate himself as an intellect,but should not think that others are fools…. is good enough to tighten him

I almost sought police protection against this letter –so underworld- ish it sounds. Read the lines’ Good enough to tighten him’! How more personal can you get.
On the same topic another reader said I was ‘bigoted’ and called me names .
Then came a response from someone in New Delhi who wanted to know if I were a ‘circus clown’. An Indian from Texas wrote that I was suffering from a disability considering what I wrote n my piece about suicides in south India. Of course this guy is probably influenced by Bollywood movies where making fun of disabilities is a form of comedy never mind the total contempt it shows to the less fortunate among us. A reader from Coimbatore told me to restrict myself to articles in my area of specialisation-lateral thinking. I told him not to read articles in areas other than HIS area of specialisation! I was kidding.
The list is long but you get the point.
My question is this—Is it not possible to express disagreement with style and respect? Is it not possible to segregate a person’s views from his larger persona? If I disagree with you does it necessarily mean that I consider you to be a total fool? Can we not disagree and yet be friends? Can we not confine our responses to facts and opinions on specific points rather than launch a general tirade on the person who has written something?
What is in evidence in such instances is possibly the play of what can be called the ego. Somewhere my articles inadvertently hurt some people’s ego or sense of self worth . We are an ultra sensitive people and take to heart any comment that is not in sync with our views. What is worse we rush to convert any comment into a generalised attack on our identity –not just our individual identity but on our race, community, state or language group. I have been assaulted by a barrage of harsh comments for my article on why India shining is a myth that the middle class is nourishing at the cost of over 700 million Indians who live on less than Rs 20 a day .It’s been months since I expressed these views and I am still getting hate mail
I have been airing my hypotheses about this in the past. It goes like this. A nation starts by feeling inferior about itself—that was India’s plight not so long ago when we were victims of socialism .Then a country becomes touchy about any criticism of itself. India—a now developing India—is now in that stage, We are touchy about any negative report . We were touchy about toilets at the Commonwealth Games village being sub-standard. The middle class India which strives to impress white nations was up in arms against this dirty toilet report. This class would have not risen in revolt if the games were Indo-African games!! Finally a nation reaches a stage where it cares little for what others think. China is such a nation. Then there are nations that are self confident and go about their business quietly far from international media glare.
That will happen to India—this quiet self confidence—but we have to MAKE it happen. One way of doing that is to be restrict emotionality and allow rationality a greater play even when I write articles that do not meet universal approval!! COOL.!
K.R.RAVI
WWW.KRRAVI.COM
.