r/politicalhinduism

Economic growth matters. Higher incomes can mean better homes, better infrastructure, more opportunities and a higher standard of living.

But is becoming richer enough to say that a society is developing?

Imagine Bharat's economy becoming dramatically larger over the next few decades.

But at the same time:

• education remains poor for large sections of society,
• healthcare remains inaccessible,
• inequality increases,
• cities become harder to live in,
• the environment deteriorates,
• family and social systems get destroyed
• youth population collapses due to fertility rate dropping
• or people have less trust in the institutions around them.

Would we still call that development?

And on the other hand, if a country improves people's health, education, security and opportunities without becoming the world's richest country, how should we think about that progress?

So:

What should "development" actually mean for Bharat?

Is economic growth the foundation of everything else?

Or should Bharat measure progress through a much broader idea of human well-being?

I have constantly seen hindus being blamed for what happened in 1984 to Sikhs but this narrative is completely false and misleading! Even wikipedia mentions RSS as a perpetrator when in reality RSS helped save many Sikh lives, they sheltered many Sikhs from violence, Vajpayee himself saved Sikhs from bloodthirsty Congress workers.

What happened in 1984 was completely the fault and actions of bloodthirsty Congress members who wanted revenge yet today Hindus are being portrayed as the villains for it. This clearly an attempt to divide hindus and sikhs who are the only Dharmic groups to have fought together for Dharma. Sikhs are true brothers of hindus and this has been the case since the time of the Sikh Gurus.

Now, I am not a Khalistani supporter or anything, Khalistanis are bad and they are also part of this narrative as they continue to blame Hindus and India even though all the killings and actions were perpetuated by CONGRESS.

There are probably things about Bharat that most of us know only partially or never learned at all.

Not necessarily obscure facts. Things that help you understand why Bharat is the way it is.

It could be something about:

• our history or civilizational traditions
• languages and regional cultures
• the Constitution and institutions
• the economy
• science and technology
• Indian knowledge traditions
• art and literature
• how different parts of Bharat developed differently
• India's place in the world

So here's the question: What do you wish every Indian understood about Bharat?

It could be something you think is overlooked, misunderstood, oversimplified, or simply not taught well.

What is it and why do you think it matters?

These mfs didn’t just redraw a map — they tore a nation apart. Imagine the India we could’ve had if their decisions had never happened. Decades later, we’re still living with the consequences of borders carved by political greed and incompetence. Absolutely fucking infuriating.

Every society changes. The difficult question is what should change and what shouldn't.

Take almost any aspect: language, family, education, traditions, religion, institutions, technology, economics, governance.

Some things may need to evolve with time. Others may be worth preserving precisely because they connect one generation to the next.

But where do you draw the line?

If we try to preserve everything, we may become resistant to necessary change.

If we change everything, we may eventually lose the things that gave us continuity in the first place.

So for Bharat: What should we never lose?

And what should we be willing to change? Pick one area if you want and explain your reasoning.

According to the 2026 Edelman Trust Barometer, India has a Trust Index score of 74, placing it among the highest-trust societies surveyed well above the global average of 57.

Trust influences how societies cooperate, build institutions, do business, and solve collective problems.

How important do you think trust is to a nation's long-term success?

Doesn't have to be a huge event or some obscure trivia.

Just one historical fact that made you stop and think, "I never looked at India the same way after learning this."

Please don't share conspiracy theories as facts like aliens built some structure lol.

At BharatSabha, we often use the phrase "Bharatiya lens." But what does that actually mean in practice?

Imagine two thoughtful people looking at the same issue in Bharat. It could be education, economic development, environmental conservation, governance, foreign policy, technology, family, healthcare, justice or any other public question.

Both are well-informed. Both genuinely want the best outcome. Yet one perspective feels like it could have come from almost anywhere in the world.

The other feels distinctly Bharatiya. What makes the difference?

Is it the values behind the decision? The questions being asked? The assumptions about society? The balance between individual and community interest?

Or something else entirely? We're not looking for textbook definitions.

We're interested in how you recognize a Bharatiya way of thinking when you see it and what makes it meaningfully different from other POVs.

If it helps, choose one field such as education, economics, governance, foreign policy or technology and explain what a distinctly Bharatiya perspective might look like there.

Five years is long enough for new experiences, better information, or changing circumstances to reshape how one sees the country.

What's one opinion you've genuinely changed your mind on and what made you rethink it?

It could be about society, governance, culture, the economy, education, technology, or anything else related to India.

The goal isn't to judge whether the opinion is "right" or "wrong," but to understand what changed your perspective.