In ancient times we allowed different invaders to loot our country,then we remained slaves of the British and now letting the corrupt politicians rule us...
When we face cheating/injustice anywhere,we just tolerate and go about our lives...For example-If a shopkeeper charges more than the MRP,and if we try to rebel,the people around us will stand & watch or make fun of our craziness that we are fighting for Rs. 10-15 extra,besides letting this dishonest person misbehave with us further.So we give in
No wonder even after getting independence long back we are still a "developing" nation
So the question is:Why do we tolerate so much injustice/nonsense?
We were not like that. We are made like that. When british occupied, there were a series of struggles starting from 1857. In Independent India also, our governments, people stood for justice at international platforms. When Suez canal was nationalised by Egypt in about 1956, US and U.k. came from long distance to attack the Govt. of Egypt for nationalising the canal flowing within Egypt. India stood solid behind the people of Egypt and Govt. of Egypt along with the then USSR. We supported blacks in South Africa and stood against apartheid. We brought reforming matrimonial laws in Hindu religion despite a strong protest from some sections of Hindus in 1956. We brought radical changes in various laws, prohibiting the dowry, punishing the dowry deaths. But, due to introduction of liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation, we became very selfish as an individual human being and as a State. When U.S. and U.K. attacked Iraq, we became silent spectators without murmering a protest against US and in return asked more HI visas. We sent our contractors, engineers and labour to Afghanisthan for a few dollars without giving them protection. Our children are bashed in Australia, we became mum, where as, once upon a time, we were the champions to fight against the apartheid. We allowed the dillution of laws protecting the women and children. We always discouraged the economically weaker sections to get the legal redressals. The labour are denied of bonus. If they protest in chorus, we terminate their services. If they approach the court, we drag the cases decade after decade, so that they have to spend more money on litigation than what they get after winning the case. We lost sensitivity towards poor, physically challenged person, old people, childrent and even to our life partners. Some of our political class encourages this apathy amongst its people so that they can plunder the loot. They want to raise our political consciousness only to such level to hear their false promises after every five years and vote for them, so that they can rule the roost.
People of this country has short lived memory. They do not take things seriously, once issue is anyhow over, we just forget.
Use of rights is the matter of individual - USE IT OR LOOSE IT.
As you said, because of this attitude only the Indian society was ever ruled by the outsiders. The local people even so called RAJAs have also not shown the courage to fight for their rights and ever surrendered before power of sword and presented their everything including gold, elephants, camels, woman including their Rajkumaris. The same attitude is continued as it is in the blood of these cowards. The shortsighted selfishness is in the cultural of our Indian society for which they can collapse down to any level and exploitor ever enjoy.
You see everyday, if someone fights with the TC in train for his claim on a reserved berth at same time some other offers 200 rupees to the TC with folded hands before like beggars and by such way when they grab a berth of someone else they feel pride. In such case the TC enjoy. So who is guilty first? People are ready to cut neck of others for their selfishness. So, the mediator public servants and politician ever enjoy and it is not their fault.
Those who are ready to sacrifice their Rajkumaris for having a luxury easily their attitude will be same as you have mentioned.
I am sorry but I ever say the same as I feel. Saying "Black' for "Black" I do not no any other "civilised & polished word" insted of "Black". If it sound bad or unparliamentary so what should I do, please suggest so I will say "a litte dark" for "Black".
Here I am pasting excerpts of the biography of Maharana Pratap. This is self explanatory, where do we lack.
“Maharana Pratap never accepted Akbar as ruler of India, and fought Akbar all his life. Akbar first tried diplomacy to win over Maharana Pratap but nothing worked. Pratap maintained that he had no intention to fight with Akbar but he could not bow down to Akbar and accept him as the ruler. Some scholars argue that there was some possibility that Maharana could have become friends with Akbar, but in the siege of Chittor Akbar had killed 27,000 civilians. This left a lasting impression on Maharana's mind and he decided he could not bow to such an injustice and cruelty.
Tod's Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan relates that Pratap stopped the marriage etiquette of Rajputs who had been giving their daughters to Mughals (some traitor Rajput kings had also given their daughters to Mughals in marriage due to the hegemony and tribute exacted by the cruelty of the Mughals) and his supporting Rajputs instead:
With such examples as Marwar and Amber and Amer (of giving their daughters to Mughals), and with less power to resist the temptation, the minor chiefs of Rajasthan, with a brave and numerous vassalage, were transformed into satraps of Delhi.
But these were fearful odds against Pratap. The arms of his country turned upon him, derived additional force from their self-degradation, which kindled into jealousy and hatred against the magnanimous resolution they lacked the virtue to imitate. When Hindu prejudice was thus violated by every prince in Rajasthan, the Rana renounced all matrimonial alliance with those who were thus degraded. To the eternal honour of Pratap and his issue be it told that, to the very close of the usurpation of the Moguls, they refused such alliances not only with the throne, but even with their brother princes of Marwar and Ambar. It is a proud triumph of virtue to be able to record from the autograph letters of the most powerful of the Rajput princes, Bukhet Singh and Sawai Jai Singh, that whilst they had risen to greatness by the surrender of principle, as Mewar had decayed from her adherence to it, they should solicit, and that humbly, to be readmitted to the honour of matrimonial intercourse and "to be purified," " to be regenerated," " to be made Rajputs" and that this favour was granted only on condition of their abjuring the contaminating practice (of giving daughters to Mughals) which, for more than a century, had disunited them.””
Pratap retreated into the hilly wilderness of the Aravallis and continued his struggle. His one attempt at open confrontation having thus failed, Pratap resumed the tactics of guerilla warfare. Using the hills as his base, Pratap harassed the large and therefore awkward Mughal forces in their encampments. He ensured that the Mughal occupying force in Mewar never knew peace: Akbar dispatched three more expeditions to ferret Pratap out of his mountainous hideouts, but they all failed. During this era, Pratap received much financial assistance from Bhamashah, a well-wisher. The Bhil tribals of the Aravalli hills provided Pratap with their support during times of war and their expertise in living off the forests during times of peace. Thus the years passed. As James Tod writes: "There is not a pass in the alpine Aravalli that is not sanctified by some deed of the great freedom fighter, Maharana Pratap Singh; some brilliant victory or, more often, some glorious defeat." On one occasion, the Bhils saved the Rajput women and children in the nick of time by conveying them into the depths of the ancient zinc mines at Zawar, near Udaipur. Later, Pratap relocated to Chavand in the mountainous southeastern area of Mewar. Still harassed by the Mughals, the exiles survived in those ravines for many years by subsisting on wild berries and by hunting and fishing. Legends say that Pratap had to eat chapatees made of grass seeds in troubled days.”
“When the exiles were facing the prospect of actual starvation, Pratap wrote to Akbar indicating his readiness to negotiate a treaty. Pratap's first cousin (his mother's sister's son) Prithviraj Rathore, who was one of Akbar's courtiers, heard of this overture. He is said to have grown despondent and wrote thus to his cousin Pratap:
The hopes of the Hindu rest on the Hindu surya yet the Rana forsakes them. But for Pratap, all would be placed on the same level by Akbar; for our chiefs have lost their valour and our females their honour. Akbar is the broker in the market of our race; he has purchased all but the son of Udai (Singh II of Mewar); he is beyond his price. What true Rajput would part with honour for nauroza [the Persian new year's festival, where Akbar selected women for his pleasure]; yet how many have bartered it away? Will Chittor come to this market ...? Though Patta (an affectionate name for Pratap Singh) has squandered away wealth (on warfare), yet he has preserved this treasure. Despair has driven man to this market, to witness their dishonour: from such infamy the descendant of Hammir (Maharana Hammir) alone has been preserved. The world asks, from where does the concealed aid of Pratap emanate? None but the soul of manliness and his sword.. The broker in the market of men (Akbar) will one day be surpassed; he cannot live forever. Then will our race come to Pratap, for the seed of the Rajput to sow in our desolate lands. To him all look for its preservation, that its purity may again become resplendent. It is as much impossible for me to believe that Pratap has called Akbar his emperor as to see the sun rising in the west. Tell me where do I stand? Shall I use my sword on my neck or shall I continue my proud bearing?
Pratap replied to him:
"By my God Eklinga, Pratap would call the oppressor Turk alone (the word 'Turk' carries a pejorative flavour in many Indian languages) and the sun would rise in the east. You may continue your proud bearing as long as Pratap's sword dangles on the mughal head. Pratap would be guilty of Sanga's blood, if he was to tolerate Akbar. you would have the better of it, no doubt Prithviraj, in this wordy quarrel."
Thus ended the incipient rapprochement between Pratap and Akbar. This Prithviraj Rathore was the husband of Kiranmayee ,sister of Shakti Sinh (Stepbrother of Maharana Pratap).”
It is the Bheel community who stood behind Maharana, not the rulers and his own relatives, Rulers of Rajasthan, all joined hands with Akbar and moughals, at the cost of their daughters and sisters, just to save them and their ruler tag. Still that syndrome is prevailing. Traitors have become ruler, and finding pleasure by torturing their own people/countrymen.
So, Bhils are far better than the so called civilized and elites.
We are forgetting/sidelining our real god/saviour.