So if I say that the Saudi government and their practices which stem from their culture are bad because they kill gays, kill non believers and enslave women then I'm being racist?
Well then I guess I don't have to care if I'm being called a racists because you've made it into a good thing.
However, the failure of the Saudi state has come from within, when the House of Saud was infected by the expansion of Wahhabism in the Islamic world, where two previous states lead by the House of Saud failed, and a third, today's Saudi Arabia (formed in 1932) is also heading towards ruin, but doing so entirely under their own power and leadership.
The failure of the Indian state is due to British rule for over 100 years in which India's own culture was heavily distorted through the lens of colonialism efforts; in addition, Pakistan leaving and declaring its own Islamic government has also not helped India heal from this. The current state of India is due to outside influences.
Bad things happen due to the extreme poverty in India all the time, but the very specific things said in the article are all distortions of Indian culture that are no longer practiced, even in the most backwards towns.
What the NYT did is no different than if today's Saudi Arabia had stopped it's anti-humanitarian efforts and chose to transition into a modern government instead, and you claimed they still killed gays, non-muslims, and whoever else for non-crimes.
India obviously has only taken the first steps in becoming a modern nation, but what the NYT did is not helping India at all.
In short, the NYT is going to have to prove it. Photos, videos, whatever. This is no different than any other editorial hearsay otherwise. If they had actually found human rights violations in the scale and severity implied in the article, the NYT would be running this as front page news, and world governments would be pressuring India to fix this.
Look I agree that some of that stuff in this article is complete and utter nonsense.
For example where it is explained that women wash mens feet and then have to drink the water. Whoever believes this must be either stupid or ignorant.
And that's exactly how I would comment on this. The person who wrote this article is clearly either not well enough educated to have any business writing articles about this for the NY Times or that person is simply ignorant.
But I very much doubt that there is some racism involved here. People sometimes write hurtful or stupid things and I did so myself occasionally but when I did it's not because I hate some specific culture but because of incomplete information or knowledge. (though I'm not a journalist or a politician, so it's not that bad if I get things wrong occasionally)
Well then I guess I don't have to care if I'm being called a racists because you've made it into a good thing.