The Crisis of Conduct, When Tourism, Tradition, and Civic Decay Collide in Modern India

The Crisis of Conduct, When Tourism, Tradition, and Civic Decay Collide in Modern India

The twin letters published from concerned citizens in Goa—Vinay Dwivedi on the desecration of a sacred river confluence and Jerry Fernandes on the harassment of women tourists on beaches—paint a stark and unsettling portrait of a society grappling with a profound crisis of civic and ethical conduct. These are not isolated complaints but symptomatic of a deeper malaise that strikes at the heart of India’s social fabric, its tourism economy, and its cultural heritage. One letter speaks to the violation of spiritual and environmental sanctity, the other to the violation of personal and bodily autonomy. Together, they frame a critical national conversation about the contradictions of a nation eager to showcase its grandeur to the world while failing to instill basic respect within its own spaces and among its own people. This article delves into the interconnected roots of these issues, exploring the psychological, socio-economic, and regulatory failures that allow such behavior to persist, and proposes a holistic path toward reclaiming dignity, safety, and sanctity in public and sacred spaces.

Part I: The Desecrated Confluence – Civic Apathy and the Death of the Sacred

Vinay Dwivedi’s account of Kshetra Mahuli, the confluence of the Krishna and Venna rivers, is a poignant elegy for both ecological and spiritual health. His visit, undertaken for a friend’s funeral—a moment of profound personal and ritual significance—was marred by the sight of a sacred landscape transformed into a dumping ground. “The area strewn with foul-smelling waste… even the rivers resembled drains,” he writes. This observation is devastating in its implications.

The Sacred Geography Turned Sullied: Confluences, or sangams, in Hindu tradition are among the holiest of geographical features. They are places where rituals are performed to facilitate the soul’s journey, where pilgrims bathe to cleanse sin, and where the divine is believed to manifest in the flow of water. To see such a site polluted is not merely an environmental issue; it is a profound cultural and spiritual failure. Dwivedi’s anger is palpable: “We desecrate even places of worship and show little respect for our heritage.” This act of littering is, on one level, a simple lack of civic sense—the inability to carry one’s waste back. On a deeper level, it represents a catastrophic disconnect from the very meaning of the space. The individualistic act of discarding a plastic packet overrides the collective understanding of the site as a shared, sacred trust.

The “Hurt Sentiment” Paradox: Dwivedi makes a sharp, critical connection to a wider national trait: “This reflects very poorly on us as Indians, especially those whose sentiments are hurt at the drop of a hat.” Here, he highlights a dangerous hypocrisy. Public discourse in India is often inflamed by perceived insults to religious symbols or historical figures, leading to protests, violence, and political mobilization. Yet, the most tangible, daily acts of disrespect—the physical trashing of a live, flowing temple like a river—are met with widespread apathy. This paradox suggests a culture where symbolic piety is prioritized over practical stewardship. It is easier to rally around an abstract offense than to organize a cleanliness drive or to police one’s own behavior. The river, as a living ecosystem and a theological entity, is thus twice victimized: first by pollution, and second by the indifference of those who claim to revere it.

The Underlying Causes: This behavior stems from several interlinked factors:

1. The “Somebody Else’s Problem” Syndrome: Deeply ingrained in public psyche is the notion that public spaces are “nobody’s” space, and thus not one’s personal responsibility. The state is seen as the sole custodian, absolving the individual of any role.

2. Failed Waste Management Infrastructure: At many heritage and pilgrimage sites, basic infrastructure—adequate, maintained bins, regular collection, signage—is absent. This creates a practical excuse for littering, though it does not justify it.

3. Mass Tourism Without Mass Education: Sites like Kshetra Mahuli attract visitors who may lack awareness of their significance. Tourism is promoted, but concomitant education on respectful conduct is missing. The journey becomes a photo-op, not a pilgrimage of consciousness.

Part II: Beaches of Harassment – Toxic Tourism and the Objectification of Women

If Dwivedi’s letter laments the pollution of nature and spirit, Jerry Fernandes’s letter exposes the pollution of social interaction and the violation of personal space on Goa’s famous beaches. The arrest of tourists for photographing foreign women without consent is a specific incident that opens a window into a pervasive, ugly underbelly of parts of India’s tourism economy.

The Anatomy of Harassment: Fernandes describes a clear pattern: “male tourists allegedly taking photographs and videos of foreign women in swimwear and passing suggestive or lewd remarks.” This is not casual observation; it is a calculated act of intimidation and objectification, designed to assert power and violate privacy. The beach, a space of leisure and freedom, becomes a zone of anxiety and vulnerability for the targets. The police crackdown indicates the scale has reached a critical point, threatening Goa’s brand as a safe, welcoming destination.

The Toxic Mindset: “Goa Mein Kuch Bhi Chalta Hai”: Fernandes diagnoses the root cause with a popular, destructive phrase: the belief that “anything goes in Goa.” This mindset is catastrophic. It frames Goa not as a sovereign state with laws and a unique culture, but as a lawless playground, a safety valve where norms of decent behavior are suspended. This perception is often tied to a specific tourist demographic: domestic, male-group tourists who, as Fernandes notes, “leave their families behind.” For them, Goa represents a space of performative masculinity and licentiousness, where alcohol consumption and harassment are seen as part of a packaged “fun” experience. The targeting of foreign women is particularly telling, often rooted in a mix of exoticization, perceived impunity (thinking foreign tourists are less likely to report or pursue legal action), and a warped sense of entitlement.

The Economic and Social Repercussions: This behavior is not just a moral failing; it is an economic and social threat.

• Reputational Damage: Goa competes in a global tourism market. News of harassment travels fast via travel advisories, review platforms, and social media, deterring the high-value, respectful tourists the state needs.

• Erosion of Local Social Fabric: It creates a hostile environment for local women and families who wish to use their own beaches. It also fosters resentment among locals toward a certain type of tourist, damaging the host-guest relationship.

• Policing Burden: It forces law enforcement to divert resources to manage a preventable social nuisance, as seen with the formation of a dedicated tourist security police.

Part III: The Unifying Thread – The Crisis of the “Public” and the Failure of Governance

Though seemingly disparate—a polluted river confluence and a harassed tourist on a beach—these issues are two sides of the same corroded coin: a failing relationship between the individual and the public sphere.

1. The Commodification of Space: In both cases, public spaces (heritage sites, beaches) are treated as consumables rather than commons. The litterer consumes the beauty and sanctity of the river and discards the “packaging” (waste) on site. The harasser consumes the visual landscape of the beach, treating people within it as objects for his gratification without regard for their humanity or rights. Both acts are extractive and disrespectful.

2. The Spectator Society vs. The Citizenry: Both scenarios point to a populace that often acts as a passive or entitled spectator rather than an active citizen. The littering individual does not see themselves as a steward of the river. The harassing tourist does not see themselves as a guest bound by the social contract of the host state. There is a lack of ownership and accountability for the health of the shared environment and community.

3. Regulatory and Enforcement Gaps: Governance failure is a critical enabler.

   • At heritage sites like Kshetra Mahuli, there is a glaring lack of enforcement of environmental protection laws (like the Water Act, 1974) and solid waste management rules. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) or local temple trusts often lack the resources or mandate for holistic site management that includes crowd behavior and waste.

   • On beaches, while laws exist (Sections 354, 509 of IPC for outraging modesty), enforcement has been historically sporadic. The current “crackdown” is a reactive measure. A sustainable solution requires proactive, visible policing, and a justice system that deals with such cases swiftly and sternly to create a genuine deterrent.

The Path Forward: From Crisis of Conduct to Culture of Respect

Addressing this deep-seated crisis requires a multi-pronged, sustained effort that moves beyond reactive policing and cleanup drives.

1. Integrated “Respect Campaigns” for Tourism: The Goa Tourism Department, in collaboration with the Ministry of Tourism, must launch state-specific “Responsible Tourist” campaigns. These should be hard-hitting, translated into multiple languages, and displayed at airports, railway stations, and hotels. They should clearly state:
* For Heritage/Eco-Sites: “This river is a temple. Your trash is a desecration. Leave only footprints, take only memories.” Mandate portable ashtrays and waste bags for pilgrims.
* For Beaches/Public Spaces: “Goa welcomes you, but harassment is a crime. Photography without consent is illegal. Respect women, respect Goa.” Display clear numbers for the tourist security police.

2. Community-Led Stewardship and Vigilance:
* At sacred sites: Empower local village panchayats and temple committees to manage cleanliness. Introduce a small, voluntary “cleanliness fee” that funds local waste-picker groups for on-site management. Promote spiritual leaders to preach the theology of environmental stewardship (Prakriti Rakshati Rakshita: Nature protects if she is protected).
* In tourist zones: Train and employ local community wardens, especially women, who can serve as friendly but firm points of contact, deterring harassment and assisting tourists. Support NGOs like the “Beach Vigil” groups.

3. Robust and Sensitive Law Enforcement:
* For pollution: Implement a strict “Polluter Pays” regime at heritage sites. Spot fines for littering must be levied consistently and visibly.
* For harassment: The tourist security police must be permanent, well-trained in sensitivity and handling foreign nationals, and highly visible on foot patrol. Ensure women officers are part of these teams. Fast-track courts for tourism-related offenses can ensure swift justice.

4. Reforming the “Package Tourist” Model: The tourism industry itself must evolve. Tour operators promoting all-male group packages must be held accountable for their clients’ conduct. Promotional material must shift from portraying Goa solely as a hedonistic escape to highlighting its culture, nature, and heritage, attracting a more diverse and respectful visitor base.

5. National Curriculum for Civic Sense: Ultimately, the solution is generational. A mandatory module on “Civic and Environmental Ethics” is needed in schools. It should teach the concept of the commons, gender sensitivity, respect for heritage, and practical lessons on responsible tourism—treating future citizens as potential hosts and gracious guests.

Vinay Dwivedi’s question, “When will we finally learn some civic sense?” and Jerry Fernandes’s hope for continued police action, represent the two essential pillars of the solution: internal cultural change and external structural enforcement. The filth at Kshetra Mahuli and the fear on Baga Beach are wounds on the body of the nation. Healing them requires acknowledging that the pursuit of economic growth through tourism and the expression of religious faith are empty if they are not underpinned by a fundamental, non-negotiable respect—for our environment, for our shared heritage, and for every individual’s right to dignity and safety. Until this respect becomes the bedrock of public conduct, India’s aspirations to be a global leader will remain hampered by the very real failures in its own sacred rivers and on its own sunny shores.

Q&A Section

Q1: Vinay Dwivedi connects the littering at a sacred site to Indians being quick to have their “sentiments hurt.” Is this a fair comparison, or does it conflate two separate issues?

A1: Dwivedi’s comparison is sharp and deliberately provocative, highlighting a critical hypocrisy, but it requires nuanced understanding. He is not conflating the issues but contrasting the energy behind different types of offense. The defense of abstract symbols (e.g., a flag, a statue) often triggers immediate, organized, and vocal public outrage, sometimes leading to violence. In contrast, the tangible, ongoing desecration of a living, sacred entity like a river generates widespread apathy and inaction. The fair critique is about the misdirection of communal passion. It suggests a cultural priority where symbolic piety is performative and politically potent, while practical, environmental piety—which is central to actual Hindu texts and teachings—is neglected. The issues are linked by the theme of “respect,” but one manifests as reactive, often aggressive sentimentality, while the other’s absence reveals a passive, enduring disrespect for the physical world.

Q2: Jerry Fernandes mentions a “misplaced mindset” among some domestic tourists. What socio-cultural factors might contribute to this belief that “anything goes” in a tourist destination like Goa?

A2: Several interconnected factors feed this mindset:

• The “Holiday Alter-Ego” Syndrome: Vacations are often psychologically constructed as breaks from normal life, including its social constraints. For some, this mutates into a license for transgressive behavior.

• Exoticization and Anonymity: Goa, with its distinct culture, beachwear, and presence of foreigners, is perceived as an “exotic other” within India. This, combined with the anonymity of being away from one’s hometown, can erode inhibitions.

• Media and Bollywood Portrayals: Popular culture has long sold Goa as a trope for unchecked partying, romance, and freedom from rules, reinforcing the “kachra hai” (it’s chaotic) or “anything goes” image.

• Packaged “Bachelor Party” Culture: The growth of tourism catering specifically to all-male groups explicitly markets Goa as a zone for excessive drinking and libertine behavior, socially endorsing the mindset.

• Perceived Impunity: A belief, often mistaken, that local authorities will not strictly enforce laws against tourists for fear of damaging the industry, or that foreign victims will not pursue lengthy legal battles.

Q3: What are the specific legal provisions under which the tourists harassing women on the beach were likely arrested, and what are the challenges in making such arrests effective deterrents?

A3: The most likely charges are under the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

• Section 354: Assault or criminal force to a woman with intent to outrage her modesty. This covers lewd remarks, stalking, and unwanted physical contact.

• Section 354A: Sexual harassment, specifically including making sexually coloured remarks or showing pornography.

• Section 354C: Voyeurism, which includes watching or capturing images of a woman engaged in a private act without her consent. Photographing someone in swimwear without permission in a manner that invades privacy could fall under this.

• Section 509: Word, gesture, or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman.

Challenges to Deterrence:

1. Underreporting: Victims, especially foreigners, may not report due to language barriers, fear of complex legal processes, short stay duration, or shame.

2. Evidentiary Hurdles: Proving lewd remarks or intent can be difficult without audio/video evidence or independent witnesses.

3. Bail and Delayed Justice: Offenders often get quick bail, and cases languish in overburdened courts for years, diluting the impact of the arrest.

4. Social Normalization: The behavior is so normalized among certain groups that perpetrators may not even perceive it as a serious crime.

Q4: How can the management of heritage sites like Kshetra Mahuli balance open access for pilgrims and tourists with the imperative for preservation and cleanliness?

A4: Balancing access and preservation requires a “Carrying Capacity” based management model:

• Regulated Infrastructure: Install ample, aesthetically appropriate waste bins and deploy sufficient sanitation staff. Ban single-use plastics within a radius of the site.

• Visitor Education: At entry points, use signage, audio announcements, and volunteers to explain the site’s significance and rules. Distribute biodegradable bags for personal waste.

• Monetizing Stewardship: Include a small, mandatory preservation fee in pilgrimage tour packages or vehicle parking. This fund should be transparently used for site upkeep.

• Community Incentive: Formalize and pay local self-help groups or waste-picker cooperatives for managing segregated waste, creating a local economic stake in cleanliness.

• Technology Aids: Use discreet CCTV to identify and fine habitual litterers. Develop apps for visitors to report dirty spots or overflowing bins to management in real-time.

Q5: Beyond police crackdowns, what long-term, soft-power strategies can the Goan government and civil society employ to fundamentally change tourist behavior and self-police conduct?

A5: Sustainable change requires shaping social norms:

• “Ambassador” Programs: Recruit and train respectful long-stay tourists (domestic and foreign) as volunteer “Goa Ambassadors” to model good behavior and gently correct peers.

• Engage the Hospitality Industry: Mandate that hotels, hostels, and homestays provide guests with a “Goa Responsibility Charter” at check-in and brief them on local laws and customs.

• Positive Marketing Rebrand: Shift advertising from purely hedonistic imagery to campaigns showcasing respectful families, heritage explorers, and eco-tourists enjoying Goa. Use the tagline “Enjoy Goa, Respect Goa.”

• Leverage Social Media Influencers: Partner with responsible travel influencers to promote etiquette. Run campaigns like #ClickResponsibly (about photography consent) or #LeaveNoTraceGoa.

• School and College Outreach: Conduct programs in schools across India (especially in major tourist-source states) about being a responsible traveler, teaching respect for local cultures and environments as part of life skills.