English-Educated Indians & Stratfor’s American “Imperial Class”

Readers probably know by now that we are not enamored of the “English-Educated” Indian (“EE-Indians”) class. It is indeed a class and its members get favorable treatment all over India. Even basic Hindi Television shows build up this aura with characters saying “Hum Padhe Likhe Log Hai” (we are “educated” people) or by others gently reprimanding those who create a scene with “Aap padhe likhe lok ho; appko yeh shobha nahi deta” (you are educated people, you should not behave this way“).

1. The Definition of EE-Indian

It is imperative to understand and really
understand that “English-Educated” in this context is NOT synonymous with proficiency in English. Mahatma Gandhi
studied at University College in London and became a barrister. But Gandhi was a core Indian. In fact, Gandhi blended the
teaching of the Upa-Ni-Sad texts into his message to Indians. Lokmanya Tilak, the man whom Gandhi called his guru, the first leader to call for Swarajya or Independence, was a great scholar, equally proficient in Sanskrut and English. Almost
all leaders of India’s fight for freedom were proficient in English. But
they were all 100% Indian, scholars of Indian culture, history
and literature.

In contrast, the
people we call “English-Educated” Indians are almost 100% educated in English
and only in English from 1st grade onwards. Their expertise in or even
basic knowledge of Indian texts, literature, history, philosophy or
religion, is virtually nil. This ignorance does not shame today’s
EE-Indian class but fills them with arrogance towards the “desi” or
“core” Indians.

2. The Elite of the English-Educated Indian Class

The noveau elite of this English-Educated or EE-Indian class are journalist opinionators, especially those who write for American & European publications. The recent emerging markets boom saw money flow into India, not just into technology, industry & finance, but also into Bollywood, Television and Journalism. Today, it is a rare European-American media entity that does not have an India presence and a decent size staff of EE-Indians. American think-tanks are also beginning to enter India thus increasing the financial and visibility (these two feed off of each other) opportunities for EE-Indians.

Perhaps coincidentally, perhaps by educational training, or perhaps by perceived marketability, the EE-Indian class has adopted a mindset similar to what is expected by the European-American media.
This has led to what we described as a closed-feedback loop in our March 2, 2013 article Anne Applebaum, Tom Friedman et al on India – Blinders, Myopia or Closed Feedback Loop? This closed feedback loop has in effect increased the prosperity and power of the EE-Indian class, especially with the political circles in India which have a horror of being branded as “dehati“, a EE-Indian synonym for ‘backward“.

Every one of you know at least 1-2 members of the EE-Indian class. So we ask you to decide whether the description below fits the EE-Indian class:

“An “educated” class is a large group of people who have a deeply evolved sense of “secular-progressive” mission, and whose professional interests are connected to that mission succeeding. They number of journalists and policy experts at think tanks who collectively define the debate among elites throughout the “Mumbai-to-Delhi” media corridor; and by defining that debate determine the opinions that bombard any administration on the “liberal” policy front. This class is financially well off and generally educated at the best schools. It is the product of “two” decades of prosperity going back to the post-“1990” era. Whereas “Delhi” in the mid-“1990s” decade had barely a handful of think tanks, the city is now packed with them. As for the media, it now constitutes a power center all its own that includes both liberal internationalists and “secular-progressives”, both of whom have in the past supported using the “EE-Indian-Journalistic” corps to impose “secular-progressive” values.”
“I am implying that its influence on policy is permanent. It is permanent because prosperity breeds a class of global cosmopolitans, whose “Indian” branch is defined by harboring “secular-progressive” tendencies masked as humanitarianism.”

Does the above define and describe the elite EE-Indian class? If you agree, prepare to be surprised if not stunned. Because the above words are not ours and the description above is of an American class, not Indian. All we have done is remove the original class descriptors from a Strator article and replace them by above words in “bold italics”.

So what class does the original Stratfor article refer to? Who is the author and what is his thesis?

3. America’s Imperial Class

The author is Robert Kaplan, the Chief geopolitical analyst of Strator and the author of the celebrated book “Monsoon: The Indian Ocean and the Future of American Power”. First, Kaplan’s thesis about America:

“The United States is an imperial power and has been for more than a century….America’s empire is without colonies, suitable for a post-modern information age in which capital is not necessarily tied up in permanent territorial holdings. But make no mistake, America’s troops have been and still are in imperial-like situations the world over, from South Korea to Afghanistan to the Indian Ocean and the Western Pacific: grappling on the ground and on the blue waters with the need to maintain order over exotic swathes of the earth, like the Romans, Venetians, Portuguese, Dutch and British did before them.”
“Like empires of yore, the United States periodically sends its forces into harm’s way in imperial-like interventions, seeking to oust this foreign tyrant or that for supposedly threatening the empire’s interests. Of course, American officials, of whatever administration, always claim that they are acting in such a fashion for the sake of human rights and humanity, but that is similar to what the officials of previous empires usually said. Many empires have had strong philosophical organizing principles, in which they label their own values as universal ones. And often they are right. Rome, Venice and Great Britain were not only militarily dominant but were also the most enlightened powers of their ages — with Venice and Britain by the standards of their eras being truly liberal imperiums. And so, democracy at home and military imperialism abroad can go hand in hand.”

Robert Kaplan attributes this “military imperialism” to America’s “Imperial Class”:

Now these imperial-like military interventions have often been ill advised, but they happen nevertheless. They happen partly because there is an imperial class in the imperial capital of Washington, D.C., that agitates for them. (emphasis ours)

So what is America’s Imperial class and what are its beliefs? Kaplan’s asks the question and answers it. Readers, you know that answer already. It is in the two paragraphs we quoted at the beginning of this article to define EE-Indian class. Change as below to translate:

“American” for “Indian”; “Imperial” for “English-Educated”; “Imperialist, Military, Neoconservative” for “Secular Progressive”.

Put in this translation in the two paragraphs above and you get Kaplan’s definition of America’s Imperial Class. The comparison between EE-Indian & America’s Imperial Class is rather stunning isn’t it? But then reality is often stranger than fiction.

4. America’s Global Posture & India’s Global Posture

The above comparison may explain why America’s posture in the world is so 180 degree different than India’s. America’s foreign policy is greatly influenced by its intellectually dominant, financially powerful, ideologically united Imperial class. This is why America’s posture in the world is typically aggressive and militaristic, regardless of the type of the President in power. Under President Bush, it was so in the name of defense of the homeland, the war against terror, etc. Under President Obama, it has been in the name of human rights, protecting innocent civilians against their dictators, etc. America is confident and aggressive because of the confident outreach of the Imperial Class.

In contrast, India’s posture in the world is relentlessly apologetic for India’s backwardness, its religion & culture. Ind
ia tends to apologize in almost every case, for almost every reason and promises greater appeasement. It jumps up at every opportunity to give up, whether it be territory to China, Pakistan or it be the historical identity of the Indian Subcontinent to neighbors for the generic South Asia descriptor. India remains utterly pacifist despite frequent and persistent attacks on its territory and its core culture.

Is this because India’s policy is greatly influenced if not dominated outright by its own intellectually dominant, financially powerful and ideologically united EE-Indian class? We think so. In fact, the contrast between America’s Imperial class and India’s EE-Indian class explains a great portion of the complete contrast in America’s global posture & India’s.

So rather than asking why is India so different than America, we should be asking why is America’s Imperial class so different than the EE-Indian class?

5. The Difference in Historical Origin

From where do the above two dominant classes derive their purpose and zeal? Both do so from their own predecessor classes. The predecessor of America’s Imperial class was the Imperial class of the late 18th century & 19th century Britain. And America shares the same ethnicity with Britain. That is why America seamlessly became the successor imperial power of 19th century Britain.

Very few understand that the predecessor class of EE-Indians was the Persian-Educated Indian class that ruled India’s intellectual, literary and social scene from 1300 CE to about 1800-1850 CE.

Delhi was the physical capital of North India during this period but Persia or Iran was its cultural capital. The physical rulers were Turkic-Afghans or Mughals but the ligua franca was Persian. The invader-rulers were far smaller in number than the Indians they ruled and they needed loyal Indians who would help administer and spread the ruling culture.
This was an opportunity for a large number of bright and, perhaps disloyal, Indians. They mastered Persian language, culture and literature. Many of them converted to Islam but conversion was not mandatory to become an esteemed member of the Persian-Educated Indian class. In fact, having large numbers Persian-Educated Hindus was considered advantageous by the smarter Muslim rulers. These rulers showered fancy titles and riches on this Persian-Educated Indian class elevating them to a higher status than “indigenous” Indians.

Today’s EE-Indian class does not merely share ethnicity with its Persian-Educated predecessor. It is in fact the physical descendant of its predecessor. Today’s EE-Indian class derives it historical origin and its definitional zeal of worshiping European-American cultural norms while denigrating Indian culture, religion, philosophy, literature from its ancestors, the class that adopted Persian cultural norms in the same manner for over 500 years.

6. What does this Difference Mean?

Both classes, America’s Military Class & India’s English-Educated Class, have their good points and bad points, their successes and failures. The huge difference is that America’s Imperial Class is a 100% “America first” class that is culturally backed by America’s majority while India’s English-Educated Class is a 100% “India is pathetic” class that exists to fight India’s majority culture. This is the essential difference between American democracy and Indian democracy. The number of ways in which this difference manifests itself in today’s Indian democracy is a topic for another article.

For now, just remember this difference when you read Indian editions of American & European publications like BBC, New York Times, Wall Street Journal and others. Then you will see see how their EE-Indian staff heap scorn on Indian culture while their American-European staff never do so on American or European culture.

Send your feedback to [email protected] Or @MacroViewpoints on Twitter