3/28/2025 at 4:45:23 PM
I was born in the US but my parents are from Kerala and I still have family there that I visit.One thing I found interesting was the pride in literacy and education. Kerala has a 96% literacy rate which is the highest in India [1].
It's one of my favorite places to visit. Unlike other parts of India such as Bengaluru, Mumbai and Hyderbad -- it's tropical and lush with much less pollution than what you might see in those other parts of India.
My parents have a home in a rural community which hasn't changed much in the past few decades compared to somewhere like Bengaluru. It's quiet and slow with a high important on family relationships. No doubt it's westernizing, albeit slower than other parts of India - but for now it still holds much of the charm I've known since I was a kid.
by jmathai
3/29/2025 at 3:01:21 PM
I think the focus on literacy is laudable. However, as the article points out the wealth isn’t locally generated, it is basically folks going out to gulf states sending back remittances. So while literacy has helped that there is not much to be said for local industry.I don’t see any startup tech or manufacturing in India falling over themselves to start in Kerala.
by orochimaaru
3/28/2025 at 7:33:58 PM
Like many in the diaspora, you may have a romantic view of your roots.> much less pollution
Comparatively? Perhaps. One look at the Vembanad Lake and you'll know what I'm talking about: https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Kochi/high-levels-of-fa... It stinks these days.
> Kerala has a 96% literacy rate
Lieracy surveys aren't as rigorous; likely 5% to 20% drop from reported numbers: https://www.dataforindia.com/measuring-literacy/
> still holds much of the charm
As someone who visited Kerala multiple times a year, things have gotten worse both climate wise & pollution wise. Though, the monsoon gods still bless Kerala, it isn't as green as it used to be. I've found (under similar climatic conditions) the Sri Lankan lowlands (West coast) to be more greener. Ditto for rainforests of NE India & SE Asia.
by ignoramous
3/28/2025 at 8:28:42 PM
> Lieracy surveys aren't as rigorous; likely 5% to 20% drop from reported numbers: https://www.dataforindia.com/measuring-literacy/This is very well studied in sociology and anthropology and has been for many decades. Kerala is a major case study in many fields because of this.
by guerrilla
3/28/2025 at 10:52:59 PM
To add to this: the most recent "96.2% literacy" estimate is based on a 2017 survey (not the 2011 census) where they interviewed a little over 2500 households in Kerala, though there are 7.7 million households there. I'm not a statistician, but this feels like too small of a sample size to make a definitive estimation.In addition, other states got very close to that literacy rate, but are probably managed quite differently to Kerala. Worth considering if people want to try to replicate Kerala's efforts without considering the wider context
by 0xbadcafebee
3/29/2025 at 1:52:59 AM
Most of the literacy education efforts started in the 1800s in Kerala. For example,> Education in Kerala has deep historical roots, dating back to the rule of local dynasties and the influence of colonial missionaries. The rulers of Travancore and Cochin played a crucial role in establishing schools and promoting learning, especially among marginalized communities. The British and Christian missionaries also made significant contributions by setting up institutions that emphasized modern education.
> In 1817, the Travancore government issued a royal decree stating that education should be provided to all, including women and lower castes. By the early 20th century, Kerala had already built a strong foundation for literacy, ensuring that access to education was widespread.
https://livekerala.com/blog/how-kerala-became-indias-most-li...
by kelipso
3/29/2025 at 12:06:45 PM
You're right. You're not a statistician. My point was against yours. The consensus by experts in myltiple fields, who study specifically this, is that literacy in Kerela is exceptionally high. That is one study among many, one that only confirms what they way they already know.by guerrilla
3/28/2025 at 9:17:50 PM
The connection between education and wealth is very strong. Very sad that the US has decided to pursue a trajectory towards poverty in this area.by not_kurt_godel
3/29/2025 at 2:37:17 AM
It may be strong to a point, but many countries are beyond that point. Look at how many countries there are that are better educated than the USA but have lower incomes. Japan, Germany, Canada, probably dozens more.by WorkerBee28474
3/29/2025 at 2:27:38 PM
Three points on that:1. Secondary and tertiary education is not all there is to education. A self-learned software engineer might lack a capital-E education, but has still spent significant time and effort on learning.
2. Education is one of many aspects of a successful life, at least as important is conscientiousness, diligence, intelligence and luck.
3. The US benefits from many virtuous cycles. In regards to the labor force it is able to attract a lot of the best talent in the world.
Given the current political climate in the US, it seems prudent to point out that point 3 isn't just true for business-men, doctors and other nerds, undocumented immigrants are some of the hardest-working people out there. They contribute almost 100b in taxes alone, and get almost no services in return.
by bakuninsbart
3/29/2025 at 5:20:21 AM
Higher income does not equal higher quality of life. Which is, arguably, what really matters to people.by zoul
3/29/2025 at 6:46:50 AM
QoL is a relative metric though. If you see people around you living better than you, your QoL becomes poor even though you live better than 99% of people in the worldby aprilthird2021
3/29/2025 at 11:02:53 AM
I think that with TikTok and such channels squeezing out the ability to read, the entire humanity is embarking on a massive de-literatization experiment.by inglor_cz
3/29/2025 at 8:54:17 AM
Questionable. There is defiantly some connection, but in what direction is open for debate. But its also the case that the Soviet block countries had lots of educated people, but couldn't make the economy work out.And given for how many years the US has had sub-optimal results in international education comparison, while the overall economy has done well also doesn't fit.
by panick21_
3/29/2025 at 4:34:14 PM
Education is tricky. The wrong education can really stunt your economic competitiveness. I'm sure the Soviet world had plenty of classroom time devoted to the glory of Communism. Each classroom probably had a politruk available to help out.Too many kids go to other universities and study similar things. It's fine to explore these ideas, but at the end of the day you've got to make someone happy or they won't pay you.
by xhkkffbf
3/29/2025 at 5:27:48 PM
They also had really good maths and other useful things. They actually did what many in the West many wanted. Their education wasn't bad, learning wrong history isn't really that economically relevant.But yeah, if the economy can't use those people its just not effective.
by panick21_
3/29/2025 at 5:49:27 PM
Learning wrong history can be economically relevant. So much of history is about learning patterns of human behavior. Patterns that often repeat. If you learn wrong or untrue history your understanding of and expectations for human behavior will be incorrect which will certainly cause economic issues.by human_person
3/29/2025 at 7:53:32 PM
Maybe if you are in top level government. But for 99% of workers it doesn't matter much.Also, much of typical school history most people learn is incredibly shallow and the waste majority of people barley remember anything. Research show this pretty clearly. So teaching something wrong, is not gone matter much.
by panick21_
3/30/2025 at 3:26:04 PM
No one does fake history better than the CCCP.by xhkkffbf
3/28/2025 at 9:51:17 PM
In popular US culture the pursuit of wealth, is framed as crass. Movies that some see as promoting wealth accumulation are often actually critiques against wealth.Also, since the mid 60s pop culture has embraced the slacker as being hip and cool.
They guy and gal trying to get ahead are portrayed as greedy or at best blindly joining a rat-race forgoing more noble pursuits. Not so for many other cultures.
by mc32
3/29/2025 at 4:23:55 AM
I don't think this is true anymore. "Selling out" is now seen as a goal. Kids post fake ads on their instagrams to convince each other that they have brand sponsorship deals. Every celebrity, from reality-show nobody to AAA-lister shills for their own signature alcohol or cell phone carrier. The culture celebrates grindset mindset crypto-scam rugpulls and denigrates anyone who toils at a 9-5 as a wage-slave who'll never make it.by evan_
3/28/2025 at 10:05:30 PM
I think that in almost all western countries, a life spent entirely on hoarding wealth for the sake of wealth, is considered a sad life. Especially if you don't even have any loved ones to share your wealth with.I think the same it true for most of Latin america, where many of my friends and colleagues are from. And when I was in Nepal they thought that, if anything, western people are way too much focused on gathering wealth.
Islam specifically rejects hoarding wealth, so I think that pretty much takes out most of the middle east and northern africa.
So I'm curious which other cultures you are referring to. Perhaps specifically Indian and Chinese culture?
by paulluuk
3/29/2025 at 2:22:35 AM
Islam specifically rejects hoarding wealth, so I think that pretty much takes out most of the middle east
I don't know much about religions but I don't believe it is that clearly delineated. How would you explain Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain, from my limited vantage point they seem pretty much all in on their religion. Are they practicing a perverse form of Islam like the Christian who practice prosperity gospel?
by nick__m
3/29/2025 at 6:54:00 AM
There's no such thing as prosperity gospel in Islam. I researched all the major religions when I decided to become religious in my 20s. The prosperity gospel even in Christianity has very loose / 0 underpinnings in any actual theological study.The Gulf countries became wealthy because of oil. They don't really hoard that wealth though. They are pretty famous around the world for investing that money, no? They fund universities (with many Gulf countries having their own outpost of NYU or other such prestigious colleges), arts and arts museums (there is a Louvre in the Middle East), tech startups, and of course invest in tourism to diversify their country.
They also have many horrible qualities, which are 100% not condoned in Islam like employing slaves in deadly conditions even though all nations agreed to abolish slavery years ago. Or confiscating the passports of foreign workers. Or their ethnostate mentality (similar to Israel where citizens must be of a specific blood lineage even though the majority of people living in their nation are not of that lineage). I could go on and on.
Anyways, Tl;Dr, I don't think they really hoard wealth. They do spend and invest in the world around them and find lots of charitable things (they have rebuilt Palestine a few times now, a very costly endeavor). Also, being Muslim doesn't mean they don't do anything morally wrong by that religion's standard. Same as the many charlatan "priests" of various religions in the world.
by aprilthird2021
3/29/2025 at 5:25:44 AM
Islam is probably the most economically savvy major religion (Mohammed was a merchant after all). Unlike other religions which issue blanket prohibitions on things like charging interest or having wealth Islam is more pragmatic. Hoarding wealth is considered sinful when it means that others are going without but it is not a sin to make money, have money or be rich. The gulf states could all broadly be described as socialist. Yes they have a lot of money but pretty much everyone lives on welfare and enjoys a high quality of life (nobody is going hungry or falling ill from easily treated diseases). In a country where everyone has attained a high standard of living there is no issue with someone having a huge pile of cash. We could throw out labor issues from guest workers, but that is a bigger topic.by blululu
3/29/2025 at 7:27:36 AM
Sorry but they cannot be described as socialist because workers rights are non existent. Just because there is some protection for the native Arabs doesn't mean it can be "broadly described as socialist". There is no protection for the Bangladeshis, Filipinos, Indians, etc, who are doing the work. Protecting the working class is pretty much the point of socialism. This is a ludicrous statement.by Gud
3/29/2025 at 8:12:16 AM
They’re welfare states, with three classes of residents. A slave-like underclass, disenfranchised expats, and citizens who get paid off by their royal families with generous benefits. Maybe the closest analogy is Ancient Rome?by ern
3/29/2025 at 8:24:04 AM
I don't think the underclass is living under slave like conditions though.Full disclosure, I worked in Dubai for 2 years(as a disenfranchised expat), working closely with guys from above mentioned countries. I install heavy machinery.
It's true some are treated poorly, but most are there genuinely there out of free will, because they make buckets of money to send back home. One Pakistani foreman I worked with had stashed away 250k Dirhams and was going back home to start his own business.
The gulf states can/could be an opportunity for the poor, see Bin Laden family for a famous example.
More than criticizing the gulf states for using these people as cheap labor, the criticism should be aimed at their corrupt governments not giving opportunities to their own population. Ironically they are not even allowed inside Europe and the US.
FWIW my experience in Dubai changed my views on the region to a much more nuanced one.
by Gud
3/29/2025 at 10:04:41 AM
Islam is a very practical religion. And that applies to how it treats wealth and socialism.Like many religion it emphasises the importance of being good, and doing good, to enjoy the rewards of that in the after life (i.e. it teaches delayed gratification). But it also recognizes that advocating its adherent to forego all wordly attachment and live like a saint is also not practical for society. Thus, it also pragmatically says that a muslims doesn't have to wait for the afterlife to enjoy the rewards of good deeds - God has given humans the ability to enjoy certain pleasures in life, and achieve a higher sense of spiritual enlightenment, and that too depends on the good deeds you do in this life:
Whoever does good, whether male or female, and is a believer, We will surely bless them with a good life, and We will certainly reward them according to the best of their deeds. (Quran 16:97)
Islamic scholars interpret this as a promise from God to the Children of Adam, who do righteous deeds - deeds in accordance with the Book of God and the teachings of His Prophet, with a heart that believes in God and His Messenger. God promises that He will give them a good life in this world and that He will reward them according to the best of their deeds in the Hereafter. Some scholars say this means a life with feelings of tranquillity in all aspects of life, while some suggest it means contentment and / or happiness in this life.More here: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/12702/is-there-reward-for-go...
That is why no muslim needs to feel guilty about the wealth they have inherited or earned provided it is done through honest means, without hurting others, and they also follow the Islamic obligations of Zakat (charity). This charity is how socialism works in Islam. Islam says that the wealth of the world doesn't belong to anyone but God. And wealthy muslims (and rulers) are just custodians of his wealth. And God commands the wealthy to share their wealth with the poor, and prescribes how this should be done (annually 2.5% of your wealth should be given to the poor and needy). Even here, Islam is very practical - it recognizes how human nature is often suspicious of helping strangers, and thus says to look for people within your own family, your own friends, your own neighbourhood, your own muslim community etc. (i.e. your own social circles) to do this kind of charity.
More on this: https://thequranrecital.com/zakat-obligatory-charity-explain...
And this kind of wealth creation, with charity, is seen in the middle-east, amongst all these middle-eastern countries you mentioned.
by thisislife2
3/29/2025 at 6:01:36 AM
It's also commonplace in traditional Buddhist and Hindu cultures, especially a lot of the older upper class in India are obsessed with following Gandhi-like living too. You still find it in many Buddhist countries like Sri Lanka and South East Asia too.by YouAreRONGS
3/29/2025 at 6:55:21 AM
The world would be a great place if the older upper classes learned from and tried to emulate Gandhiby aprilthird2021
3/29/2025 at 6:59:47 AM
A lot of the older upper class Hindus in India do actually act like that. And it's also quite common in Sri Lanka and South East Asia for the upper class to do that.by YouAreRONGS
3/29/2025 at 3:05:52 AM
That's because America is fundamentally a Christian country. I know no one wants to hear this. But this zeitgeist is unmistakenly Christian.Interestingly enough the same forces are at work in kerala, which is one of the most Christian states in India (and the ruling communists are associated with them)
by anon291
3/29/2025 at 3:19:23 AM
Can you expound on this idea? What does anti-wealth have to do with Christianity and how does Communism enter the frame in India?Prior to the mid 60s seeking betterment and wealth was one of the main reasons people migrated to the US replacing religious persecution back home as the main reason to come.
by mc32
3/29/2025 at 4:05:24 PM
Christianity in India is often framed against the prevailing religion Hinduism, for better or worse. The Indian church emphasizes things like social equality, income equality, etc. Some of the earliest labor activists and trade unionists in India were Catholic (actually Catholics in general are generally pro union across the world, see the Catholic vote here in America).Secondly, Catholics are often setting up schools for everyone. India has always had a history of education, especially Kerala, but universal education of even the lower classes is extremely protestant. The church ended up adopting this around the time colonialism started and thus brought universal education to a widespread base in India.
Finally, the idea of touching everyone and treating them equally was against the general zeitgeist of the prevailing feudalistic highly hierarchical indian society. The first conversion attempts of the Portuguese for the south indian brahmins actually were incredibly successful (Nicholas of Tolentino). The Vatican even allows (and still allows as far as I'm aware, although no one does it) vedic rites for Catholics (malabar rites controversy).
However, no one wanted to give up untouchability. The Vatican eventually forced the missionaries to not have separate missions for touchables and untouchables, which basically ended Brahmanic conversions (and is one of the reasons indian Catholics no longer really care to do the vedic rites, since most are now from the lower class. As far as I know, some still do in Mangalore). Caste is still a problem in some christian communities in India but the bishops work to end it and it is officially condemned.
Which is to say, catholicism is associated with labor movement, equal social treatment, and universal education.
Which is also what the communists want.
It's no surprise that Kerala, being way more christian (and Catholic particularly) with a rich and prominent Christian history is thus the center of socialism.
Keep in mind also that communism in feudal countries has basically no relation to the communism you find on university campuses of america.
Now to the west. In the west, the church is seen as conservative, but the church is actually radically left wing in most parts of the world. It's only because leftism (in a global sense) is fundamentally a part of western culture that the church seems right wing because the church does not go as far as some leftist parties in the west.
by anon291
3/29/2025 at 3:13:07 PM
I was raised by a catholic system in Kerala christian heartland. For decades every Roman Catholic church required to have a school associated with it mostly primary but often secondary - managed by priests and nuns. These priests are heavily connected to Rome often visiting or getting their degree from there. I often hear Matthew 19:23-24 preached during sunday mass and many people have become content with what they have even though its barely enough.If you ask me about communism, I would say its effects were kind of bad - overseas remittence came in as gulf nations flourished but for others from 60s till end of 90's economic opportunities were bleak. It came in power around 1956 in Kerala and a lot of privileged christians migrated to US in the following decades - with the christian cultural background they have, they integrated really well in that society.
by SandraBucky
3/29/2025 at 6:57:56 AM
Christianity (esp. Catholicism) and socialism have a long connection, especially in South America, which did not have the economic miracle Kerala did.Kerala did not become wealthy from socialism, it became literate and land reform lifted many out of poverty. The actual wealth started accumulating when Keralites took advantage of opportunities to work abroad and send remittances home. That has been a major economic driver for the state and India as a whole, but they did it long before others did, largely because land reform gave people a safety net to fall back on so they could risk going abroad to earn more
by aprilthird2021
3/30/2025 at 12:09:05 PM
Socialism maybe the but the Roman Catholic church has a strong history of opposition to communism.I would suggest God's Bankers: A History of Money and Power at the Vatican as for a pop-culture introduction of how the Catholic church aligned itself with fascist states including Mussolini's PNF, the Nazis and the Ustaše.
The Ustaše were particularly closely associated with the Catholic church.
by Lio
3/30/2025 at 3:57:25 PM
> Roman Catholic church has a strong history of opposition to communismIndia is so far removed from Europe that things work a bit differently.
The keralites were not communist the way European countries were
by anon291
3/28/2025 at 10:06:00 PM
A lot depends on how exactly you pursue wealth. You could say that Donald Trump and Elon Musk have both striven to "pursue wealth" in their business careers, but nonetheless they did so in very different ways. And plenty of people will likely find Donald's approach somewhat "crass" compared to Elon's.by zozbot234
3/29/2025 at 3:17:53 AM
but US have many top ranking universities in the world, how can you believe that US is behind in education?by tonyhart7
3/29/2025 at 2:17:09 PM
Universities accept international students, and hire faculty educated outside the USMore relevant would be K-12
by SJC_Hacker
3/29/2025 at 3:37:01 PM
It’s all relevant, but there is zero doubt that the US has the best higher education in the world (although this administration seems hell bent on attacking it). There’s a reason more international students come to the US than anywhere else for higher education.by azinman2
3/29/2025 at 4:35:26 PM
They hire foreigners largely because they're much cheaper than Americans. The schools have little trouble getting visas for foreign professors so, of course, they maximize their profits by hiring the cheapest they can get.by xhkkffbf
3/29/2025 at 6:01:06 PM
I don't think thats the case at allAt least in STEM, its all about the ability to get grants. A professor who consistently gets grants is worth their weight in gold in "indirect" costs. Foreigner or otherwise
by SJC_Hacker
3/30/2025 at 3:24:26 PM
Look at any department. It's rare for all of the professors to get big grants. Usually a substantial fraction are essentially paid by either undergraduate or graduate tuition. In these cases of the non-constellation professors, it's better to get someone who is both good enough and cheap.by xhkkffbf
3/29/2025 at 8:54:25 AM
I honestly can't tell if you're referring to the current administration or the previous one with this comment.(Fun SNL video with similar confusion: https://youtu.be/8h_N80qKYOM)
by sporkland
3/29/2025 at 5:56:25 AM
Literacy is a by-product of raising living standards. It's not inherintly something that will alone lead to higher living standards.by YouAreRONGS
3/29/2025 at 6:46:04 AM
While I agree, countries like the US where everyone was pretty much already literate decades ago, can and do backslide into anti-intellectualism even when living standards are rising. I have seen it myself.by aprilthird2021
3/29/2025 at 6:50:11 AM
Is that really anti-intellectualism? Do you have any examples?by YouAreRONGS
3/29/2025 at 1:08:36 PM
Europe had really high literacy long before it reached the living standard of most of current Africa. Living standards do not have to be high for near universal literacy.by peterfirefly
3/29/2025 at 12:33:25 PM
That's patently not true. The connection exists only as far as if you're uneducated (and/or have subnormal IQ), you're likely to be poor, I suspect because you're not smart enough to master the basic skills to function in society, so it might be because of the latter.Outside of the US there are very few countries where being highly educated (as in having an in-demand degree from a prestigious university) nets you anything beyond a small earnings bump over the middle class, and the people who have this are a small elite (no more than a few percent) everywhere.
by torginus
3/28/2025 at 7:10:43 PM
> Unlike other parts of India such as Bengaluru, Mumbai and Hyderbad -- it's tropical and lush with much less pollution than what you might see in those other parts of India.Somewhat ironically these are relatively low pollution as large cities in India go. There is still a good amount of greenery in Bengaluru (it is famous for it) but obviously far less than a few decades ago, as many residents lament.
by vinay427
3/28/2025 at 8:37:03 PM
Bangalore today is a shadow compared to the Garden City it once was.For outsiders not in the know, Bangalore was famous for its beautiful lakes and the lush greenery around them. It was absolutely something else, finding these beautiful water bodies smack in the middle of what is supposed to be a major city. The weather was cool, almost like a warm European summer (which is extremely cool by Indian standards).
Then they got greedy, drained the lakes, built real estate and office properties on them and now Bangalore is an unbearable cesspit just like any other Indian city. Bad weather, bad traffic and a shit scenery.
I still have some photos of my visits to Bangalore in my childhood a couple of decades back, and the visual contrast between past and present is so stark. Of course, locals love to resent the regression of the city, but they also love their coin.
by fakedang
3/28/2025 at 9:41:37 PM
Hey, Mumbai folks will fight you for supremacy on bad scenery. Course we concede the actual crown to our dearest friends in Delhi.by intended
3/29/2025 at 8:15:15 AM
I'll be honest, Mumbai is still very scenic, and I say that as someone from Kerala. Marine Drive and the Colaba area really have a very Bombay-days vibe even after all the changes in the area. While Sealink does ruin the sea views a bit, it's still not a grotesque mark on the scenery.To be honest, my only relatively poor experience in Bombay in terms of scenery was in the Four Seasons hotel in Worli, when I could get a nice view of couples going at it on the rooftops of the chawl nearby, somehow appropriately from my bathroom window.
Delhi does have its own charms too. Assuming you're a strong enough male, it's worth exploring South Delhi on foot solo over autumns, winters and spring, just immersing in the city. Obviously face mask recommended and not recommended for ladies.
by fakedang
3/28/2025 at 10:34:40 PM
My family is part of the indigenous people of Mumbai, and my mom and dad's pictures of their childhood homes and stories are almost unbelievable if you visit now. My grandparents old bungalow is still on google maps, now surrounded by skyscrapers, but in the pictures, it's all fields and trees.by anon291
3/28/2025 at 10:01:33 PM
I'm not usually not the type to be preoccupied with green policy, but this was heart wrenching to hear.by Sammi
3/29/2025 at 3:16:13 AM
"Then they got greedy, drained the lakes, built real estate and office properties on them and now Bangalore is an unbearable cesspit just like any other Indian city. Bad weather, bad traffic and a shit scenery."hope indian government turn around, because china back then has a smoke problem even in its capital too
its hard to fought stigma but its not impossible
by tonyhart7
3/28/2025 at 10:39:10 PM
I had no idea and thank you for sharing. Why did it fall apart?by hammock
3/29/2025 at 7:13:50 AM
If you want an alternative view, the state government has to largely spend money on infrastructure and welfare for non-Bengaluru voters who comprise the majority of the population and the vast majority of the land area, so often all the money that flows into Bengaluru doesn't get spent in Bengaluru itself but instead the wider state.I also think that there's a strong overcurrent of people wanting to emulate US living standards in a city that's simply designed for a different way of living, more similar to other dense cities in East Asia or maybe even Europe. You need to have skyscrapers and not large low rise estates for example.
by YouAreRONGS
3/29/2025 at 2:05:50 PM
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39712811by rramadass
3/28/2025 at 11:47:47 PM
Source: Grad student from Bengalaru I got lunch with.It became India's Silicon Valley. Acecnture. Infosys. Western IT money came pouring in and never stopped.
https://www.businessinsider.com/india-silicon-valley-bengalu...
by momojo
3/28/2025 at 11:56:06 PM
Fittingly, I’ve heard [0] a similar transformation happened to Silicon Valley itself. Apparently it used to be a bunch of orchards.[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/10672gn/til_before...
by skavi
3/29/2025 at 6:04:53 AM
I blame a lot of the cesspoll nature of Bengaluru on over-obsession with living a Silicon Valley lifestlye in the middle of a very dense city. Bengalurians should have been copying East Asian lifestyles where cities which have ancient dense cores rather than the suburban sprawl lifestyles that the US offers. A lot of the architectural and socio-cultural concepts are also much more similar to East Asia than they are to the US.by YouAreRONGS
3/29/2025 at 8:16:27 AM
Perhaps there will be a return to the roots. The new redesign of Bangalore airport is very much in line with an East Asian vision and I hope that carries over into the rest of the city. That being said, I'll still bemoan the loss of the lakes.by fakedang
3/29/2025 at 8:22:43 AM
It surprised me that tech companies opted for Silicon Valley style campuses rather than Chinese stytle skyscrapers. It's not feisable to live a Bay Area lifestyle in a city surrounded by mountains like Bengaluru. You would not have to build over lakes if you built up.by YouAreRONGS
3/28/2025 at 7:24:19 PM
[flagged]by p3rls
3/28/2025 at 9:11:46 PM
[dead]by totalkikedeath