{
  "id": 18846101,
  "title": "Why're you back? The Indian dream beyond borders",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/11/08/whyre-you-back-the-indian-dream-beyond-borders",
  "topic": "business",
  "section": "Business",
  "published": "2026-11-08T02:40:37.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "The Economic Times",
    "slug": "the-economic-times",
    "url": "https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/nri/returning-to-india/why-did-you-come-back-the-indian-dream-beyond-indias-borders/articleshow/135649583.cms"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "Since moving back to India, the most common question I am asked – often with a puzzled expression – is \"Why did you come back?\" This question suggests that living abroad must be a permanent decision, and returning home somehow requires justification. A widely shared X thread from last month by venture investor Deedy Das argued that the smartest Indians continue to migrate to the US because the economic rewards there are superior. He listed nearly twenty AI companies founded by at least one Indian person, along with their valuations. According to Das, the only reasons to remain in India are family ties, a failed visa, or deep patriotism.\n\nWhile his assessment of AI founders is correct, it applies broadly to any nation seeking cutting-edge technology – aside from China. However, I doubt that the debate over Indian emigration is as charged anywhere else. In India, it quickly takes on moral dimensions, polarizing into two contrasting views. One perspective emphasizes ambition – that only those who are exceptionally talented choose to leave, while those who stay are simply sentimental or unable to succeed. The other viewpoint champions nationalism – suggesting that leaving is unpatriotic and that one should dedicate themselves to their country's advancement. Das' remark about \"devout patriotism\" mocks this second argument. Regardless, neither perspective adequately captures the complexities of choosing to move abroad, for both the individuals making the decision and the country they leave behind.\n\nIndia boasts the world's largest diaspora, with approximately 18.5 million people living abroad as of 2024, according to UN data. Relative to its population, this represents around 1.3%. However, when considering the 95 countries with more than ten million inhabitants, India ranks 81st in terms of the proportion of its citizens residing overseas. The leaders in this list are primarily nations where people are fleeing. Over one-third of Syrians, nearly 30% of Venezuelans, and about a quarter of Ukrainians now live abroad. Following them, poorer nations near wealthier neighbors exhibit similar patterns: roughly a quarter of Romanians, one in eight Poles, and about 9% of Mexicans. The scale of the Indian diaspora is comparatively smaller. Around 3.2 million India-born individuals reside in the US, equating to roughly one Indian in every 460.\n\nNonetheless, moving abroad has long been a reality for Indians. This tradition persisted despite the long-standing belief that crossing the sea – or the \"kala paani\" – renders a Hindu an outcast. Gandhi's journey to England in 1888 exemplifies this, as his Modh Bania caste declared him an outcaste and threatened fines to anyone assisting him or witnessing his departure. Undeterred, he embarked on the voyage. Much of this migration was driven by trade routes. Gujarati, Konkani, and Chettiar merchants established extensive networks across the Indian Ocean, including East Africa, Burma, and Malaya, profiting from open borders granted by colonial empires. Simultaneously, these communities benefited from the empire's far-reaching reach. Indentured laborers from Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh were forcibly transported to Suriname, Trinidad, Guyana, Fiji, and Mauritius, while Punjabis, buoyed by their military service, journeyed to Canada, California, and England. Many sought education abroad, and prominent leaders of the national movement were themselves migrants within the empire at some point.\n\nIndependence ushered in new rules for Indian migration. For two centuries of British rule, India operated within a relatively open world economy, albeit under unequal terms. Post-independence, the nation turned inward economically and distanced itself from its overseas Indian community. In 1964, Nehru's government communicated its policy of encouraging Indians abroad to identify with their adopted countries. Emigration since independence has been sporadic. Britain enlisted Indians during post-war reconstruction, with many Punjabi immigrants working in factories and serving at Heathrow Airport. The oil boom in the 1970s attracted workers, predominantly from Kerala, to the Gulf region. America initially remained restrictive, granting only 100 Indian immigrants annually until the 1965 reform ended Asian national-origin quotas and allowed skilled immigrants to enter. In \"The Other One Percent: Indians in America,\" Chakravorty, Kapur, and Singh describe this first wave of \"Early Movers,\" comprising about 12,000 India-born individuals per year from 1965 to 1979, with 45% holding graduate or professional degrees, particularly in medicine. Subsequent waves followed family reunification, as relatives arrived to join their relatives. Analysis reveals that Indians in America succeeded through selective processes – filtered by social hierarchy at home, rigorous exams and fees, and later, family reunification – underscoring the complex interplay of ambition, opportunity, and cultural identity in shaping their experiences.",
  "summary": null,
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}