Re: Cultural Protectionism - Global & Indian Trends
Posted: 25 Aug 2011 00:18
part 5.
Process of saturation
• One of the first signs of a collective dissatisfaction with status quo and an underlying saturation of the multiple forgeries available to the population is a demand for social activism from within pre-existing ideologies and institutions. This typically comes in the form of accusations of sterility, ineffectivity, hypocrisy against existing institutions of identity construction. Wallis (1976:41, 44) suggests that the extensive erosion of belief came from the cultural conformity of the church and its consequent ethical paralysis and hypocrisy. Quebedeaux (1974) represents the "young evangelicals" as reacting against the hypocrisy of evangelical and fundamentalist churches which vocally condemn racism but worship in lily-white churches and avoid collective socio-political action (pp. 99, 115-117). However as noted by him, collective social action could become the excuse for forgetting the individual and the concrete and a further cover for not doing anything tangible. (p. 94; see also Moberg, 1977:208, and Lewis, 1967:272). Similarly Hunter et al., (1985) speak of "compassion fatigue" and Illich (1971) criticizes volunteers on short-term projects to Latin America only some of whom admitted their purpose was an expense paid vacation but like the non-admitters contributed to the damage left behind and proudly exulted at home over their alleged "summer sacrifices."
• This actually means acknowledgment on the part of the individual that his/her collection of forgeries is saturated and that existing spectrum of values no longer offer significant gains or satisfactions because even exchanging between complicity/conformity and social activism does not essentially change the detachment and non-involvement. What for Wallis( 1979) is a relacement of grace with idolatry in the radical Christians strong reaction against “cheap grace” - by overemphasizing simple lifestyle, “public protests that give them pride, identity with the poor that capitalizes on their suffering, the nonviolence principle with its manipulative will to power, a radical prophetic identity resting upon prooftexting on better than that of fundamentalists, and a tendency to protest oppression and persecution by imperialists but not by communists..” is actually therefore a forgery of the older forgery aginst which the radical is reacting. H Richard Niebuhr( Skillen, 1986:30) likewise criticized his brother Reinhold's liberalism as "a first-aid to hypocrisy. It is the exaltation of good will, moral idealism. It worships the God whose qualities are 'the human qualities to the nth degree.' "
• Believing that a politician who says "the right things" thereby demonstrates proper faith has made many religious audiences the tool of clever leaders (see Pierard, 1984). In this and other ways Christians may be hypocrites because of compartmentalization, living as if religion is separate from other areas of life (Dunn et al., 1981:117).
• One kind of dying religion is decadent by reason of hypocrisy; its representatives "claim the title of religion but ignore prayer, prophecy or service" (Fox, 1971:416). Their negligence is evident in silence and inaction in the face of evil, injustice, and the worship of such false gods as the golden calf of the hallowed economic motive( p. 417).
• Similarly, fundamentalists who care for tangible human needs only as bait for evangelism are criticized as opportunists and manipulators. Their competitors who attempt social reform without concern for immediate needs and long-term spiritual well-being of individuals also are guilty of a lop-sided ministry (see Moberg, 1985:97-116).
• Basic theological issues influence operational definitions. To those who believe salvation relates only to life in this world, other-worldly conversionists appear hypocritical for giving first priority to eternal life and presumably keeping the downtrodden complacent with the opiate of "pie in the sky by and by." The extent to which the Bible is accepted as normative and clashes between such values as love and justice on complex pragmatic issues make it easy for Christians to disagree, charge one another with hypocrisy, and hold positions at variance with official declarations of their denomination (sHero, 1970).
• resources of personnel, time, and finances are scarce forcing prioiritizing. The contrast between "social activists" and "evangelicals" is one of different priorities," not over whether we should become involved in society, but over where and how we should become involved" (Christenson, 1974:21-23). Much alleged hypocrisy comes from the pragmatic need to be selective, letting many options pass in order to work on a few. But is it not hypocritical to draw up a narrow list of social issues and proclaim that it alone is the valid set of Christian concerns?
• Among evangelical Christians there is enormous disagreement about the specific political direction demanded by the Bible. The "vast differences increasingly spawn vicious name-calling and distorted attacks. . . . Conservatives denounce radicals for overemphasizing economic justice and neglecting religious and political freedom. Radicals charge that conservatives neglect justice and exaggerate the importance of freedom. Furthermore, both accuse each other of bad faith" (Sider, 1986:1). To a significant degree, the differences among Christians are a product of coexisting, ambivalent, and paradoxical religious values flowing from diverse Hermeneutical and exegetical approaches to the Bible, but disagreements over matters of fact, their implications for policy, and priorities for action are also involved. The struggles get so discouraging that many Christians throw up their hands in a do-nothing posture. No matter what they do, some fellow Christians criticize them of being erroneous, hypocritical, self-seeking opportunists (see Moberg, 1985)
Paralysis of choice and action
• It is this paralysis of choice and action, where both liberal and conservative get equally criticized, literalists and interpretationists equally lambasted, that indicates that none of the available forgeries, even the antagonistic ones have any differential “value” to break the impasse. This is the point when all attempted and constructed forgeries have reached their equal exchange price and there is nothing within the collection of forgeries and the self, that allows the individual to reject one in favour of the other or prefer one over all the rest. In such situations we find frequent and rather easy reversals of positions, a Marxist becoming a devout Catholic, or a Catholic favouring a “liberal theological” position that sees no wrong in violent revolutions to overturn unjust regimes or even collaborating with Marxists to do the same.
• Thus even if resignations or removal from office of politicians on public revelation of say sexual deviations from supposed moral norms, may appear to be a proof of continued supremacy of sexual moral norms in the society, in reality it actually indicates something quite different.
• Where such deviations appear to have taken on wider social acceptance under the cover of consensual adult interactions and so-called “adult-games/alternative lifestyles” or even euphemisms as “exotic dances” (another peculiar accommodation of multiple forgeries manifested in obvious linguistic discomfort), it is paradoxical that the same is not applied as a value standard to politicians in public life or power. Actually the collective perception does not see such deviations as unacceptable, but as exchangeable with pre-existing opposing values that saw such deviation as a crime.
• When such an exchange possibility comes up between two equally powerful or powerless – ordinary “common” individuals, they have nothing to offer each other as additional compensatory value or extractable/exploitable profits. But between a politician in power and others who are not, the availability of deviation critical values existing side by side with accepting ones offer the possibility of extracting a profit by forcing the deviant to negotiate a honourable exit in exchange for relinquishing power.
Tradeability of values
• Just before the Islamic invasions from 8th to 13th century, there is indication that the merchants and mercantile activity based on finance capital increased - with increasing influence on the kings and regimes. The kings and merchants seem to have also allowed and protected the growth of Islamic colonies/institutions in Indian kingdoms. Important cities and university townships which are later slated for genocide appearto have had significant growth of Islmic residents in the period immediate before attck or destruction. The cases of merchants of Gujarat who participated in the double-faced activities of a Muslim merchant establishing a mosque, and the rich urban Buddhist merchants [narrated to be living it up with slaves etc] of Nirun in Sindh who were the first to welcome Qasim and provision him - shows that growth of mercantile mentality always uncannily comes with concerns about continued profits from foreign trade. Thus such a class will be ready to compromise with foreign powers and interests - as for them the hope will be that by doing so they can maintain their profits.
• This means that since the security and even basic economic interests of their birth culture and country become exchangeable commodities with a monetary price, [everything has a price right?], a stage is reached where everything becomes a tradeable asset - self, country, family, wife, daughters, children, birth society and culture, land and people. In fact the first signs of the mercantile mentality - among other things - appear in counting heads against costs, where we speak of oh only 2000 people lost their lives, but compared to that we had 8.7% growth - just think if we went to war we might have lost 20,000 people dead and been subjected to -1.2% growth for the next 50 years. Or talk of the "smallness" of the proportion of human losses, or insignificance of trauma of a rape or enslavement which can always be compensated by some monetary price.
• Actually the mercantile mentality once firmly rooted becomes the shield behind which the man hides - his absolute dehumanization into an automaton which only responds to the fetish of monetary prices. The person no longer needs to be human, with emotions, feelings, attachments, loyalties or commitments - all such responsibilities and difficult value choices can be passed on to money and prices.
• Once this stage is reached, as is obviously being reached with J&K - there is no escape from this mentality. It is the ultimate escape from humanity, from having to make human choices, based on human ideas and ideologies and values. We can see this absolute dehumanization when people innocently ask as to why is it wrong to give it all up on a platter when in return we can avoid war and make profits - they have already lost the ability to see their own dehumanization.
From paralysis to discontent
• Since ideals usually exceed performance, we can expect discrepancy to be negatively correlated with the strength and length of commitment, yet, paradoxically, higher aspirations and ideals may increase the subjectively perceived discrepancies, so people may feel more "hypocritical" as they mature spiritually.
• Parsons( 1952:296) noted a "latent reservoir of legitimation possibilities" because norms and mores are never completely reflected in reality. Babbie (1973:245) suggests that either personal or systemic discontent with the established order" may serve as a ready-made source of legitimacy for some other form of authority."New religions arising out of the discontent are closely related to Glock's deprivation theory. Yet once established, a new religion itself tends to become "hypocritical" as recruitment brings more people and leadership copes with organizational demands; it in turn becomes a source of sect members elsewhere (Moberg, 1985:118-122; O'Dea and Aviad, 1983:56-64). Under Soviet Marxism "Communists must be confessing atheists" (van den Bercken, 1985:274), but a-atheism, a form of secularization, has become fairly common. Like other sectarian doctrines," as soon as [Marxism] is accorded a ruling position, it becomes structurally interwoven with the power apparatus and each strengthens the other" (p. 270).
Socio-Psychological Perspectives
• Ulterior motives are especially hard to distinguish from others; we are more moral in words than in deeds (Scott, 1971:117, 162). Everyone "marshalls more 'good' reasons for his sins than he does for his virtues!"( Rushdoony, 1986:2). Johnson and Cornell ( 1972:36, 144- 146) found that alleged reasons for giving to church and philanthropy deviated from genuinely decisive motivations and saw compartmentalization, [workaday secular life in opposition to the sphere of the church rather than recognizing mutual interaction in scriptural perspective]. Enticements of other good things also deflected giving. Inbody (1984) cautions fellow liberals to swallow their false pride flowing from anxiety, die to insecurity and self-delusions, and repent as sinners needing forgiveness in order to transcend their situation and live up to their ideals: Our liberal assumption and assurance that we can and will live up to our ideals if we try hard enough betrays how deep self-delusion is within liberal culture. . . . The self-certainty and assumed superiority of modern liberal culture and its consequences concern me as much as our hope that the fundamentalists will become as "open-minded" and "understanding" as we are. ... to set the issue as "we" versus" they" betrays a lack of understanding of the present world-situation (pp. 88-89).
Forgery as defence mechanism
• Duncombe's( 1969:98) observation that hypocritical actions often are defence mechanisms concealing feelings, thoughts, and behaviour that are inconsistent with one's idealizations and dishonestly attempting to obscure them: [A person] will rarely tell others about his weaknesses or misdeeds even if they weigh heavily upon him. The searing memory of failures . .. remains tightly locked within. Regretted in stances of dishonesty and immorality prey upon his mind but are never discussed. . . . The same is true of what he thinks about himself. . . . Where he sees himself inferior to those he admires or envies, he may even pretend superiority in order to ease the pain it causes him. In short, the more strongly he doubts his own worth as a human, the more vigorously he will deny it before the world. Such an attempt "to become what you are not" inevitably leads to "pretense" and "hypocrisy" (p. 98).
social ethics
• Applying the concept in social ethics to tensions between private moralists and social reformers reflects anomalies in a society that promises personal freedom and concern for individual welfare, on the one hand, and social welfare for the common good on the other (Conover, 1967:33). An inevitable "hypocrisy" thus stems from society's moral code as its regulative pressures impinge upon civil liberties. The vocabulary of morality is evident in the "hypocrisy" of student protests against the "hypocrisy" of conformity to established societal customs; the idealized values of that condemned society are the basis for their judgments. Similarly, while engaging in good deeds like the Peace Corps less out of altruism than for the self-knowledge and experience such service brings, youths have brought charges of "hypocrisy" against teachers, physicians, clergy, and statesmen for their presumed motives of fulfilling private needs, not selfless service (Conover, 1967:23-25, 112-113). People with the highest levels of intelligence and awareness are the most vulnerable to inhumanities and hypocrisies of their society or subculture. They are the most ashamed of their nation's inconsistencies between ideals and reality. They also are "the least ready to make the compromises necessary for adjustment. They have a selectivity that does not allow them to accept [these faults] passively" (Lynd, 1958:233).
• Greeley (1972:233) suggests that American society makes possible more hypocrisy than most other countries. Because it is easier to be religious, there is more religious mediocrity and many more apathetic members with little or no interest in important religious issues. Society as "a network of lies and deception" (Alexander, 1975:96; see Anderson, 1986:335, and Goleman, 1985), although various forms of deception are ubiquitous" lubricants "of social life, for a basic trust, truthfulness, and sincerity essential to social order is the criterion for identifying them (Lewis and Weigert, 1985).
-----------------------------------
This was using primarily the example of Christianity in the western experience as the cultural framework that that could be heading towards "elimination of indigenous" threat. But I think the model applies to India too - and "Hinduism".
Process of saturation
• One of the first signs of a collective dissatisfaction with status quo and an underlying saturation of the multiple forgeries available to the population is a demand for social activism from within pre-existing ideologies and institutions. This typically comes in the form of accusations of sterility, ineffectivity, hypocrisy against existing institutions of identity construction. Wallis (1976:41, 44) suggests that the extensive erosion of belief came from the cultural conformity of the church and its consequent ethical paralysis and hypocrisy. Quebedeaux (1974) represents the "young evangelicals" as reacting against the hypocrisy of evangelical and fundamentalist churches which vocally condemn racism but worship in lily-white churches and avoid collective socio-political action (pp. 99, 115-117). However as noted by him, collective social action could become the excuse for forgetting the individual and the concrete and a further cover for not doing anything tangible. (p. 94; see also Moberg, 1977:208, and Lewis, 1967:272). Similarly Hunter et al., (1985) speak of "compassion fatigue" and Illich (1971) criticizes volunteers on short-term projects to Latin America only some of whom admitted their purpose was an expense paid vacation but like the non-admitters contributed to the damage left behind and proudly exulted at home over their alleged "summer sacrifices."
• This actually means acknowledgment on the part of the individual that his/her collection of forgeries is saturated and that existing spectrum of values no longer offer significant gains or satisfactions because even exchanging between complicity/conformity and social activism does not essentially change the detachment and non-involvement. What for Wallis( 1979) is a relacement of grace with idolatry in the radical Christians strong reaction against “cheap grace” - by overemphasizing simple lifestyle, “public protests that give them pride, identity with the poor that capitalizes on their suffering, the nonviolence principle with its manipulative will to power, a radical prophetic identity resting upon prooftexting on better than that of fundamentalists, and a tendency to protest oppression and persecution by imperialists but not by communists..” is actually therefore a forgery of the older forgery aginst which the radical is reacting. H Richard Niebuhr( Skillen, 1986:30) likewise criticized his brother Reinhold's liberalism as "a first-aid to hypocrisy. It is the exaltation of good will, moral idealism. It worships the God whose qualities are 'the human qualities to the nth degree.' "
• Believing that a politician who says "the right things" thereby demonstrates proper faith has made many religious audiences the tool of clever leaders (see Pierard, 1984). In this and other ways Christians may be hypocrites because of compartmentalization, living as if religion is separate from other areas of life (Dunn et al., 1981:117).
• One kind of dying religion is decadent by reason of hypocrisy; its representatives "claim the title of religion but ignore prayer, prophecy or service" (Fox, 1971:416). Their negligence is evident in silence and inaction in the face of evil, injustice, and the worship of such false gods as the golden calf of the hallowed economic motive( p. 417).
• Similarly, fundamentalists who care for tangible human needs only as bait for evangelism are criticized as opportunists and manipulators. Their competitors who attempt social reform without concern for immediate needs and long-term spiritual well-being of individuals also are guilty of a lop-sided ministry (see Moberg, 1985:97-116).
• Basic theological issues influence operational definitions. To those who believe salvation relates only to life in this world, other-worldly conversionists appear hypocritical for giving first priority to eternal life and presumably keeping the downtrodden complacent with the opiate of "pie in the sky by and by." The extent to which the Bible is accepted as normative and clashes between such values as love and justice on complex pragmatic issues make it easy for Christians to disagree, charge one another with hypocrisy, and hold positions at variance with official declarations of their denomination (sHero, 1970).
• resources of personnel, time, and finances are scarce forcing prioiritizing. The contrast between "social activists" and "evangelicals" is one of different priorities," not over whether we should become involved in society, but over where and how we should become involved" (Christenson, 1974:21-23). Much alleged hypocrisy comes from the pragmatic need to be selective, letting many options pass in order to work on a few. But is it not hypocritical to draw up a narrow list of social issues and proclaim that it alone is the valid set of Christian concerns?
• Among evangelical Christians there is enormous disagreement about the specific political direction demanded by the Bible. The "vast differences increasingly spawn vicious name-calling and distorted attacks. . . . Conservatives denounce radicals for overemphasizing economic justice and neglecting religious and political freedom. Radicals charge that conservatives neglect justice and exaggerate the importance of freedom. Furthermore, both accuse each other of bad faith" (Sider, 1986:1). To a significant degree, the differences among Christians are a product of coexisting, ambivalent, and paradoxical religious values flowing from diverse Hermeneutical and exegetical approaches to the Bible, but disagreements over matters of fact, their implications for policy, and priorities for action are also involved. The struggles get so discouraging that many Christians throw up their hands in a do-nothing posture. No matter what they do, some fellow Christians criticize them of being erroneous, hypocritical, self-seeking opportunists (see Moberg, 1985)
Paralysis of choice and action
• It is this paralysis of choice and action, where both liberal and conservative get equally criticized, literalists and interpretationists equally lambasted, that indicates that none of the available forgeries, even the antagonistic ones have any differential “value” to break the impasse. This is the point when all attempted and constructed forgeries have reached their equal exchange price and there is nothing within the collection of forgeries and the self, that allows the individual to reject one in favour of the other or prefer one over all the rest. In such situations we find frequent and rather easy reversals of positions, a Marxist becoming a devout Catholic, or a Catholic favouring a “liberal theological” position that sees no wrong in violent revolutions to overturn unjust regimes or even collaborating with Marxists to do the same.
• Thus even if resignations or removal from office of politicians on public revelation of say sexual deviations from supposed moral norms, may appear to be a proof of continued supremacy of sexual moral norms in the society, in reality it actually indicates something quite different.
• Where such deviations appear to have taken on wider social acceptance under the cover of consensual adult interactions and so-called “adult-games/alternative lifestyles” or even euphemisms as “exotic dances” (another peculiar accommodation of multiple forgeries manifested in obvious linguistic discomfort), it is paradoxical that the same is not applied as a value standard to politicians in public life or power. Actually the collective perception does not see such deviations as unacceptable, but as exchangeable with pre-existing opposing values that saw such deviation as a crime.
• When such an exchange possibility comes up between two equally powerful or powerless – ordinary “common” individuals, they have nothing to offer each other as additional compensatory value or extractable/exploitable profits. But between a politician in power and others who are not, the availability of deviation critical values existing side by side with accepting ones offer the possibility of extracting a profit by forcing the deviant to negotiate a honourable exit in exchange for relinquishing power.
Tradeability of values
• Just before the Islamic invasions from 8th to 13th century, there is indication that the merchants and mercantile activity based on finance capital increased - with increasing influence on the kings and regimes. The kings and merchants seem to have also allowed and protected the growth of Islamic colonies/institutions in Indian kingdoms. Important cities and university townships which are later slated for genocide appearto have had significant growth of Islmic residents in the period immediate before attck or destruction. The cases of merchants of Gujarat who participated in the double-faced activities of a Muslim merchant establishing a mosque, and the rich urban Buddhist merchants [narrated to be living it up with slaves etc] of Nirun in Sindh who were the first to welcome Qasim and provision him - shows that growth of mercantile mentality always uncannily comes with concerns about continued profits from foreign trade. Thus such a class will be ready to compromise with foreign powers and interests - as for them the hope will be that by doing so they can maintain their profits.
• This means that since the security and even basic economic interests of their birth culture and country become exchangeable commodities with a monetary price, [everything has a price right?], a stage is reached where everything becomes a tradeable asset - self, country, family, wife, daughters, children, birth society and culture, land and people. In fact the first signs of the mercantile mentality - among other things - appear in counting heads against costs, where we speak of oh only 2000 people lost their lives, but compared to that we had 8.7% growth - just think if we went to war we might have lost 20,000 people dead and been subjected to -1.2% growth for the next 50 years. Or talk of the "smallness" of the proportion of human losses, or insignificance of trauma of a rape or enslavement which can always be compensated by some monetary price.
• Actually the mercantile mentality once firmly rooted becomes the shield behind which the man hides - his absolute dehumanization into an automaton which only responds to the fetish of monetary prices. The person no longer needs to be human, with emotions, feelings, attachments, loyalties or commitments - all such responsibilities and difficult value choices can be passed on to money and prices.
• Once this stage is reached, as is obviously being reached with J&K - there is no escape from this mentality. It is the ultimate escape from humanity, from having to make human choices, based on human ideas and ideologies and values. We can see this absolute dehumanization when people innocently ask as to why is it wrong to give it all up on a platter when in return we can avoid war and make profits - they have already lost the ability to see their own dehumanization.
From paralysis to discontent
• Since ideals usually exceed performance, we can expect discrepancy to be negatively correlated with the strength and length of commitment, yet, paradoxically, higher aspirations and ideals may increase the subjectively perceived discrepancies, so people may feel more "hypocritical" as they mature spiritually.
• Parsons( 1952:296) noted a "latent reservoir of legitimation possibilities" because norms and mores are never completely reflected in reality. Babbie (1973:245) suggests that either personal or systemic discontent with the established order" may serve as a ready-made source of legitimacy for some other form of authority."New religions arising out of the discontent are closely related to Glock's deprivation theory. Yet once established, a new religion itself tends to become "hypocritical" as recruitment brings more people and leadership copes with organizational demands; it in turn becomes a source of sect members elsewhere (Moberg, 1985:118-122; O'Dea and Aviad, 1983:56-64). Under Soviet Marxism "Communists must be confessing atheists" (van den Bercken, 1985:274), but a-atheism, a form of secularization, has become fairly common. Like other sectarian doctrines," as soon as [Marxism] is accorded a ruling position, it becomes structurally interwoven with the power apparatus and each strengthens the other" (p. 270).
Socio-Psychological Perspectives
• Ulterior motives are especially hard to distinguish from others; we are more moral in words than in deeds (Scott, 1971:117, 162). Everyone "marshalls more 'good' reasons for his sins than he does for his virtues!"( Rushdoony, 1986:2). Johnson and Cornell ( 1972:36, 144- 146) found that alleged reasons for giving to church and philanthropy deviated from genuinely decisive motivations and saw compartmentalization, [workaday secular life in opposition to the sphere of the church rather than recognizing mutual interaction in scriptural perspective]. Enticements of other good things also deflected giving. Inbody (1984) cautions fellow liberals to swallow their false pride flowing from anxiety, die to insecurity and self-delusions, and repent as sinners needing forgiveness in order to transcend their situation and live up to their ideals: Our liberal assumption and assurance that we can and will live up to our ideals if we try hard enough betrays how deep self-delusion is within liberal culture. . . . The self-certainty and assumed superiority of modern liberal culture and its consequences concern me as much as our hope that the fundamentalists will become as "open-minded" and "understanding" as we are. ... to set the issue as "we" versus" they" betrays a lack of understanding of the present world-situation (pp. 88-89).
Forgery as defence mechanism
• Duncombe's( 1969:98) observation that hypocritical actions often are defence mechanisms concealing feelings, thoughts, and behaviour that are inconsistent with one's idealizations and dishonestly attempting to obscure them: [A person] will rarely tell others about his weaknesses or misdeeds even if they weigh heavily upon him. The searing memory of failures . .. remains tightly locked within. Regretted in stances of dishonesty and immorality prey upon his mind but are never discussed. . . . The same is true of what he thinks about himself. . . . Where he sees himself inferior to those he admires or envies, he may even pretend superiority in order to ease the pain it causes him. In short, the more strongly he doubts his own worth as a human, the more vigorously he will deny it before the world. Such an attempt "to become what you are not" inevitably leads to "pretense" and "hypocrisy" (p. 98).
social ethics
• Applying the concept in social ethics to tensions between private moralists and social reformers reflects anomalies in a society that promises personal freedom and concern for individual welfare, on the one hand, and social welfare for the common good on the other (Conover, 1967:33). An inevitable "hypocrisy" thus stems from society's moral code as its regulative pressures impinge upon civil liberties. The vocabulary of morality is evident in the "hypocrisy" of student protests against the "hypocrisy" of conformity to established societal customs; the idealized values of that condemned society are the basis for their judgments. Similarly, while engaging in good deeds like the Peace Corps less out of altruism than for the self-knowledge and experience such service brings, youths have brought charges of "hypocrisy" against teachers, physicians, clergy, and statesmen for their presumed motives of fulfilling private needs, not selfless service (Conover, 1967:23-25, 112-113). People with the highest levels of intelligence and awareness are the most vulnerable to inhumanities and hypocrisies of their society or subculture. They are the most ashamed of their nation's inconsistencies between ideals and reality. They also are "the least ready to make the compromises necessary for adjustment. They have a selectivity that does not allow them to accept [these faults] passively" (Lynd, 1958:233).
• Greeley (1972:233) suggests that American society makes possible more hypocrisy than most other countries. Because it is easier to be religious, there is more religious mediocrity and many more apathetic members with little or no interest in important religious issues. Society as "a network of lies and deception" (Alexander, 1975:96; see Anderson, 1986:335, and Goleman, 1985), although various forms of deception are ubiquitous" lubricants "of social life, for a basic trust, truthfulness, and sincerity essential to social order is the criterion for identifying them (Lewis and Weigert, 1985).
-----------------------------------
This was using primarily the example of Christianity in the western experience as the cultural framework that that could be heading towards "elimination of indigenous" threat. But I think the model applies to India too - and "Hinduism".