Do responses to the Hindenburg report reveal a colonial hangover?

What is striking is the reaction of people asking for a joint parliamentary committee, special investigation team, Supreme Court-led probe, etc, without questioning the veracity of the charges. This response seems reflective of a colonial mindset that doesn’t seem to have gone away even 75 years after India’s independence.

The quick acceptance of the 2023 Hindenburg report by several Indians raises an important question: Why do foreign analyses command such respect and authority among citizens and possibly even institutions? Is the explanation in some way connected to our colonial past? 

No doubt, during the British Raj, Indian voices were often marginalized, with knowledge and credibility skewed in favour of Western narratives. That was the basic premise of Macaulay’s approach to establishing a British model of education which sought to suppress and override traditional Indian methods of teaching. But to see remnants of this legacy even today is worrying.

In contemporary settings, any report or analysis emanating from a Western source is often regarded as superior, a phenomenon that reflects an ingrained belief in the West’s inherent authority and expertise. 

This suggests that many of us are conditioned to trust foreign evaluations over domestic assessments, viewing them as more credible and objective. It is as if Western perspectives hold greater weight.

Such an attitude could unwittingly validate the colonial mindset—under which foreign entities are seen as arbiters of truth, pushing local institutions to align themselves with their narratives. 

It is a reminder of a bygone era when Indians felt the need to seek approval from their colonial rulers. Even though the context has changed, subtle traces of it remain.

This isn’t merely about reports and financial investigations; it speaks to a broader psychological impact of colonialism that still seems to permeate Indian society. 

The belief that Western countries possess greater knowledge and more advanced systems can affect national pride and confidence. There exists a reluctance among some to trust indigenous institutions and knowledge, driven by perceptions more than rigour.

This colonial hangover may not only shape how individuals engage with issues of corporate governance and regulatory frameworks, but also influence broader aspects of Indian life, including our cultural self-identity and social interactions.

Unsurprisingly, this is a one-way street. Various critical viewpoints in Indian newspapers on Western policies, particularly those concerning human rights, foreign interventions and economic practices, are frequently brushed aside by the West. 

I don’t think there has ever been a clamour in the US, say, to ask its Federal Bureau of Investigation to probe something alleged in a foreign newspaper or report.

Articles analysing the long-term impacts of the Iraq War mounted by the US, for example, have highlighted the region’s destabilization and immense suffering faced by Iraqi civilians. 

Despite extensive media coverage and analytical pieces published in leading newspapers, these criticisms have failed to elicit any response from concerned policymakers in the US, let alone any investigation being set up by its premier agencies. This indicates a near complete dismissal of non-American discourse.

On the other hand, indices churned out by Western entities are lapped up without even an eyebrow being raised over the sample sizes they use for their surveys. How else would you explain the acceptance by some of India being ranked 108th in the Electoral Democracy Index of V-Dem’s 2023 report?

By lapping up such reports and then engaging in a never-ending public discourse on them, we seem to be giving overseas agents the power to control our narrative.

Giving up this colonial mindset, even if it influences only a small section of society, is essential for India as the country advances. Elevating local voices, supporting indigenous frameworks and cultivating a culture of self-reliance will be pivotal in dismantling the vestiges of colonial influence.

It is heartening to note that investors in India, by and large, have not let Macaulay’s legacy influence their investment decisions, as seen in the way Indian equity prices have moved after the latest set of Hindenburg allegations. Even Adani Group stocks, which underwent dips, have witnessed buying.

In conclusion, while external scrutiny can serve as a valuable mechanism for accountability, reacting viscerally to foreign assessments, without checking their authenticity, not only undermines national entities and institutions, but also perpetuates colonial thought.

It’s time for Indians to assert their own narrative and build a future rooted in confidence and integrity, free from chains of past.

These are the author’s personal views.