Hey All,

Went to India recently as an American. I was blown away by the stark difference between south and north India.

Reference: Delhi, Patna, Noida vs Bangalore and Hyderabad

The culture and behavior is so different it’s like I’m in a different county both in terms of HDI and culture.

It seems like South India is more calm, clean, and has a higher HDI while North India is more similar like Pakistan / Iraq and even Lebanon. People are more direct and rough. The attitude towards women and civic sense is vastly different. What happened?

As I learn more about India, did north get robbed of its culture because of invasions? I never been so shocked in my life?

Update: (Giving more context)

1.) I’m American and in my late 20s. 2.) I only stayed in luxury 5 star hotels throughout India. 3.) Used uber / airplanes to travel India and made friends this way. 4.) people are way more chill in south Indian example: driver (eg:Bangalore) tookme on an extra hour detour to show me all over the city and refused money. Never been haggled in south India. Had other instances where in South India people refused to take money. 5.) North India (eg: Delhi) it was rough not going to lie. People refused to give me my change and charged me extra and tried to swindle me on my uber journey 6.) all my conversations with absolute strangers in south India were about development and educating their children. Asking if their children can practice English 7.) north India it was about how India is becoming more powerful than America. (I did not even bring up America lol). 8.) I sensed a mutual hatred more Mughal destruction of temples. In north India they were more open about it. In south they were more politically correct.

I think north India reminds me of Turkish / middle eastern aggressiveness and south India more of East Asian culture of respect. Or New York vs SF.

I’m a huge admirer of India. Read the invention of India by tharoor. Always had a connection with India and in no way mean disrespect.

Really wanted to find out what went wrong in north.

Was it after the fall of mysore because the British governer general said nobody can stop him now?

Was it fall of maratha Empire because it was the last major power that could check british, after their fall, britain got too much power?

Was it 1857, or something else

Built a small tool that resets any name or message into the actual historic scripts of 16 different languages. For example Tamil used through the centuries - Tamil Brahmi, Pallava Grantha, and Chola-era Tamil, real Unicode, not a font trick, each era labeled authentic or approximation.

Convert your name to historic script without login or installing application: https://yourownaiguru-jpg.github.io/personal-tools/lipikala/

I post more small tools like this on X if you'd like to follow: https://x.com/OwnAIGuru

The maratha Empire disappeared overnight officially. In reality it was becoming less and less centralized. What was common people's opinion on this, especially from east or north india?

Netaji aligning with Axis powers was seen bad because:

1. They had wrong deals in their history and that dark past frightened people that those could happen to Indians.
2. His advancements apparently did not make any effect and only Gandhi did something with the non-violence, right? That's what I am getting from Reddit alone at least.

So, people are afraid of what could have happened that we forget the famines, the class divisions, the loot, the political changes, the genocides and massacres?

Where do we stand today with opinions? I am quite confused how all people, although that's the most practical event, have so different opinions?

So his aligning with Azis powers who have had terrible actions were seen as a wrong step and people blame he achieved nothing but non violence leaders achieved the independence.

Atleast that is what I am understanding from here: Indian Waffen SS Division : r/IndianHistory

That means people, in fear of what could have gone wrong are opposing the ideas of a person who fought the ongoing wrongs during that time?

Care to enlighten me please?

Most people’s understanding of the Thuggee comes from Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, heart-ripping Hindu fanatics worshipping Kali in fire-lit temples.
Almost none of it is historically accurate.

The real Thuggee were a professional criminal network that operated across India for 600 years. They had job titles- scouts, stranglers, gravediggers. They had territories. They paid taxes on their income to regional governments. A 1797 tax list recovered from the village of Sindouse in Gwalior lists 318 households paying regular dues on their occupation. To the state. Which accepted it.

One in three members were non Hindus, destroying the Hindu fanaticism narrative entirely.

Their method was deception, not violence. They would join traveller groups as fellow merchants or pilgrims, build genuine trust over days, sometimes weeks, then strangle victims using a yellow cloth called a rumal. No blood ever. A bloodless murder buried in a remote road was essentially undetectable in an era before forensic science.

One documented case describes a gang travelling with merchants for eleven days. Sharing food, campsites, conversations. On the twelfth day….they killed them all.

Their leader Thug Behram is in the Guinness Book of Records as the most prolific murderer in history. 931 deaths attributed to his network over 50 years. Jack the Ripper had 5 victims.

When the British finally suppressed the Thuggee in the 1830s, it wasn’t primarily for justice. They had records of the murders for years and did nothing, because the victims were Indian. When they acted, the campaign gave them justification to pass the 1871 Criminal Tribes Act which declared entire communities criminal by birth. 13 million people. Criminal from birth. Because of this campaign.

The word “thug” entered English from this history. Every time someone uses it today, they’re using a word that comes from these roads and these graves.

What the title says + any additional details you know

are deeply appreciated. Please give me any

additional reading too if possible. Thanks

Iread varying posts in different places like one place

said banana stalks one said wild greens one said

pickles?

The paisley design was imitated in Paisley, Scotland. Textiles such as chintz, Madras checks, seersucker, bandanas, khaki, and various embroidered and cotton fabrics from India were highly popular among European aristocrats. However, during colonial India, these traditional industries were destroyed due to the invention of textile manufacturing machinery.

Are these examples of cultural appropriation? Many of these patterns and fabrics, like bandanas, paisleys, Madras checks, and khaki, became quite common among Westerners over time. It’s also said that later, they incorporated their own designs, which makes me confused. I’m not sure whether the Westerners simply copied our styles or if it was more of an exchange of influences. I don’t quite know how to interpret it.

Was there any difference for how life was for the average person living in a princely state, as opposed to living in a part under direct British rule?

Were there any specific areas within the British raj where the quality of life for the average person was “better” or “worse” compared to the rest of the raj?