There is growing evidence that the Indians in Anglo-spheric countries are one of the most disliked ethnic communities. On the face of it, this proposition appears odd given that most Indians speak English in one form or another and are generally educated, however, half-baked.

Anecdotally, real estate agents in Canberra and Sydney privately acknowledge that they try to avoid Indian clients because they are “difficult” whether buying or selling houses or as tenants. Complaints range from persistent haggling to seeking to extract more from a transaction. As tenants, they give rise to an inordinate number of complaints due to the pungent odours of their cooking, loud noises, shifting furniture, slamming doors, and loud (Indian) music and TV.

From a personal perspective of being of Indian heritage, having lived through White Australia days and then the refreshing, embracing Multiculturalism, the current treatment offered to me by (white) Australian service providers comes as a shock. Two examples: Taxi drivers delaying entry into the cab – where do you want to go? – to give preference to a white passenger, to saleswomen slithering away, signalling their South Asian colleagues to deal with me. (At Myers, recently.)

It is time to address this issue; to call a spade a spade, not a garden implement. It is not enough to simply attribute this discordance to racism. No doubt, a streak of racism probably plays a part also, but the Indian mode of public behaviour is the real culprit.

The glaring fact is that Indians are largely unaware of the impact of their public behaviour. It is not a question of their values, which might or might not differ substantially from those of the host community, but rather their day-to-day style of public discourse that is so distasteful as to invite dislike, even revulsion. I have observed several instances in which a Japanese, Chinese, or Western partner patiently influenced the behaviour of the Indian partner.

This Social Divide is particularly obvious in Australia, where 1.2 million Indians are disproportionately represented in the national population of 27 million. It has now grown to 3.1 per cent of the Australian population in just 30 years, since the first ‘wave’ began, compared with 1.5 per cent of the US population in 85 years.

There is today an outcry in Australia against “Mass Migration”. This is the first time since multiculturalism was introduced in the 1970s that such a widespread complaint has come to the fore. Waves of Vietnamese, Chinese and Bosnians did not elicit such vociferousness on immigration. Vocal complaints about “mass migration” are increasing, and, when decoded, the target is Indian migration. The bald truth is that the sheer extent of their inflow has become indigestible for the Anglo-Celtic and New Australian majority.

Based on 70 years of observing Australian and Indian cultural traits, I have tabulated the more visible aspects of public behaviour exhibited by Indians abroad. These are the most obvious elements that contribute to the social divide between them. Obviously, not all Indians disregard all local norms of public behaviour; moreover, which aspects come to the fore depend on the cultural, class, and financial background of the Indian concerned.

This is an unacademic approach, I know; it is a subjective tabulation, I know. I accept that a vicious blowback is inevitable.

The objective of Cultural Intelligence (CQ) is to understand—and to explain—why people from different cultures think and behave as they do. In doing so, CQ strengthens intercultural communication and supports integration, whether in the workplace or in public life. No discipline, and certainly not a relatively young and still somewhat specialised one like CQ, should remain confined to professional or academic bubbles.

CQ needs to be taken to the streets, where cultural misunderstanding carries real consequences. Consider, for example, how it can explain the civilisational values that underlie differences in manners and etiquette between Anglo-Saxon denizens and Indians. I will address that question separately.
The Table below provides a scale from 0 (ill manners) to 10 (high etiquette).