Indian society often celebrates modernity through its substantial aspirations, including digital governance, smart cities, the establishment of universities, start-up ecosystems, and technological infrastructure. These indicators reflect ambition, confidence, and a commitment to global integration. But modernity in the traditional sense refers to more than just advancements in material technology. It signifies a more profound shift in how societies structure power, authority, and knowledge. This change necessitates logical investigation, a scientific disposition, institutional responsibility, and the capacity to challenge established hierarchies. Modernity is about creating new ways of thinking, not just about technology.

In the age of globalisation, however, modernity increasingly circulates as a transferable template. Institutional frameworks for governance, finance, and technology now traverse borders with remarkable speed. Nations frequently adopt ready-made models shaped in different historical and social contexts. India, like other states, is deeply integrated into global markets and inevitably participates in this circulation. This diffusion often proves to be both efficient and even necessary, enabling rapid infrastructural expansion and the adoption of technology.

A crucial social question arises: can modernity be imported in modular form, or must it emerge from deeper intellectual and cultural transformations? It is within this tension that India encounters what may be described as “templated modernity” the “adoption of institutional architecture without the parallel cultivation of the intellectual culture that sustains it”.

This does not imply a lack of innovation. Conversely, Indian scientists, technologists, and entrepreneurs have shown remarkable strength in a variety of fields, from space exploration and pharmaceuticals to digital infrastructure like UPI. The country’s innovative capacity is substantial. Therefore, the issue is not a lack of talent, but rather the structural conditions that determine the prioritisation and reward of innovations.

In a globalised economy, capital markets play a crucial role in directing innovation. Markets do not merely respond to needs; they often create them. Corporations with global reach and financial strength possess the power to define technological trends and consumer aspirations. Their dominance shapes the ecosystem within which domestic innovators operate. Indian startups frequently model themselves on Silicon Valley templates, prioritising valuation metrics, rapid scaling, and investor visibility. Developing urban centers often borrows the idea of global “smart city” frameworks, even when local civic infrastructure remains uneven. Educational institutions increasingly chase global ranking parameters that privilege international benchmarks over local relevance and structure.

The consequence is not necessarily an intellectual dependency; it can result in a structural asymmetry. When global corporations and capital flows dictate what is considered important, domestic innovation risks being evaluated primarily against external standards. In this context, imitation may appear economically rational. The pursuit of venture capital, global recognition, and market validation can subtly enhance a preference for replication over innovation.

A wider cultural shift where modernity increasingly takes the form of performance is facilitated by this dynamism. Actors, influencers, and performers frequently hold greater symbolic authority than scholars, researchers, or public thinkers, as is clear in India. The media frequently rewards spectacle and visibility, and social recognition gives celebrity precedence over academic achievement. This new hierarchy of prestige reveals the priority of modernity. When performers replace intellectuals in public influence and appearance, inquiry gains primacy over inquiry.

This observation does not diminish the cultural significance of art or performance. Rather, it underscores an imbalance where research, open discourse, and critical thought are competing for equal representation in the public sphere. Genuine modernity requires precisely these elements. It depends on research ecosystems that reward originality, universities that cultivate dissent and discourses, and institutions that protect academic autonomy. Without such foundations, modernity risks becoming aesthetic rather than substantive.

The tension between performance and productivity is visible across sectors. Digital platforms expand rapidly, even as public discourse becomes polarizing. While funding for research and institutional autonomy is periodically limited, infrastructure projects continue to progress. The framework of global modernity is put together quickly, but it frequently takes consistent investment to support the slower processes of scientific reasoning, independent scholarship, and critical discourse.

This crisis of this Templated modernity can be resolved by critically adapting global models rather than rejecting them. When adoption occurs before reflection and replication takes precedence over contextual innovation, modernity becomes formulaic. India has a long history of philosophical inquiry, debate, and scientific research. It can influence the course of its development. Therefore, the goal is to deepen modernity through substance rather than to showcase it through display. Instead of focusing solely on investor expectations or seeking international validation, innovation must be aligned with the lived social realities and challenges faced by rural communities.

Fundamentally, modernity is a continuous process of self-authorship. It requires conditions for research, the freedom to ask questions, and the patience to think things through. Speed is frequently praised in the global race. However, an enduring modernity is not measured by how swiftly institutions are installed but rather by whether they are animated by a culture of innovation, intellectual seriousness, and open discourse. India’s challenge is not merely to appear modern but to ensure that modernity moves from performance to productivity, from visibility to vitality and lastly , from Templated to Suited.

Dr. Ashwani Kumar, Assistant Professor of Sociology UILS, Chandigarh University

© Greater Kashmir