I am one of the ’silly idiots’ who participated in the project of trying to sell India as the ‘fastest growing free market democracy’ to foreign investors. While details such as ‘where did the money come from’ I cannot state for obvious reasons of confidentiality
(and which you should be smart enough to guesstimate from the blurb, since you and I both think you are smart enough), I can in personally political capacity speak of what I think of your thoughts on the video, and the purposes of such creations.

‘ A truly vibrant economy does not have to produce promotional videos.’ Of course. Whoever said it does? One advertises only when there is a need to sell a product, and what is being done here is exactly that, selling India’s culture latently to make real the falsity of the fabric of the image being shown. Anybody can see that so I don’t understand your point. Let me be clearer because you puzzle me. I would understand if you would say that the entire point of selling through advertising is meaningless, because selling through the market itself is an activity that creates false notions of demands, needs and builds a culture of aspirations around ownership of commodities, the epitome of which is the capitalist west right now. What you say here is, to me, pretty obvious and the inference I draw is this. If you say we don’t need to make a promotional video for a truly vibrant economy, I agree. ‘Promotional’ itself says it all, the video is trying to promote India as the destination for future investment which could look as beautiful as the images in the video, all thanks to their contribution. Within the business of selling and promoting, the video does its job. So I can’t understand your disgruntlement, for I think it is not with having created a false reality, even if you don’t agree with that point FOR you agree it is promotional and aspirational. To promote, you oversell the haves and kill the have nots, right? Happens all the time.
Then again, I am wrong, for you are unhappy with false impressions of India. So I do a little separation here of two things, one present and the other absent from your thoughts on ‘I am India’. One, that you are unhappy with the false impressions, this is not the real India. Two, you haven’t said a thing about whether you are unhappy about selling India, even though you agree it is an advertisement that also raises questions about the selling culture in general.

I pose a question to you: Do you dislike India being sold as a product or do you dislike market culture that, i believe, threatens to make products of everything that exists in an outside this world, faith, beliefs, ideas, bodies, brains et al?

I live in Washington, DC and based on personal observation, would not agree with this statement — yes, American private enterprise is out there promoting the US of A, but the various arms of the government (Federal, State or Local) are no laggards.

Yes, we Indians need to avoid self-delusion and unjustified chest-thumping. However, let’s not underestimate the power of perception.

Regardless, think we’re spending far too much time on this particular issue, starting with Atanu’s overly long rant ;-) Time we moved on to other issues. At least, I am…

As for my opinion, I have nothing further to add to Chandra’s and Prashant Kothari’s words.

So its not, sadly, about India.
:-[

Now is the age of “if you got it go flaunt it.” Welcome to the age of positioning. As Prashant pointed out, how will someone in Erie, PA will know India is a lot more than Taj Mahal, snake charmers and poverty on the streets?

I think, a country is, and should be, promoted as a corporation. This is vital as countries now compete with each other in the market place.

Feeling left out - all the progress - and they did not bother to consult you? Sour grapes.

Get a life man.

India is a country, a sovereign state, not a movie, or a tube of toothpaste, or a blockbuster movie, or even a software services company. The fact that in the grand country of the US of A, they go over the top advertising movies and toothpaste to gain market share, is neither here nor there when it comes to an incredibly amateurish video plainly unoriginal in its format attempting to portray an emerging economy.

Krugman pointed out long ago that countries are not corporations. It is at best idiotic to consider India an “India, Inc,” and at worst dangerous because the rules that apply to corporations do not apply to national economies. Sure you can promote PreparationH without inviting ridicule but use the same tactic on an economy, instead of admiration, it reinforces doubts that whatever change is happening is just superficial. Protesting too much that you are not poor is a pretty good indicator of poverty.

My favorite quote in this context is, “The louder he spoke of his honesty, the faster we counted our silverware.”

The discomfort that I have with the video starts off in its title: I AM INDIA. Watching the video I realize that not one thing displayed has had a contribution from India — from the steel mills, to the highways (shoddy imitations, though they are), the cars, the computers, the metro-rail system — nothing. That video underlines once again for me that India is a follower, not a creator or leader in technology.

Better for now to not yell too loud of how we have arrived. We haven’t. What India had and still has is something that is much superior than the inferior ability to copy and immitate technology. That something is latent and often (unwittingly) inserted in the background soundtrack to some high tech movie. Indians, no doubt, will in time figure it out but only after their “superiors” have endorsed it. When will that be? Soon enough as the Westerners are pretty much ready to graduate to the next level of Maslow’s hierarchy.

Cordially,
Atanu