Are Indians too Touchy and Opinionated?

Two completely different news items in Indian media today left me feeling strange. The first was Shah Rukh Khan’s experiences at the Newark Airport and the second referring to BJP’s move at distancing itself from Jaswant Singh’s new book Jinnah India-Partition Independence. I wondered if we Indians are too touchy and opinionated. Why do Indians treat abstract notions, public celebs and above all history with a sense of sacredness?
SKR’s ‘ordeal’ with the U.S. immigration officials and former President Abdul Kalam’s frisking by United Airlines led to widespread anguish among Indians. One of the popular newspapers in India has also opened a debated titled, “Should we treat Americans the way SKR was treated?” I am not passing a judgment over the SKR episode, but was certainly take aback by the popular reaction. Anyone who has had some interaction with the Indian immigration officials would find the public uproar hypocritical. The suspicion, intimidation and heavy handiness with which the Indian immigration treats its own citizens is apparent for anyone who has travelled outside the country. My first encounter with the Indian immigration department was scary. Standing in front of the passport stamping booth, I was made to feel like a thief absconding from the country. Especially if you are travelling on a H4 visa, you will be made to feel as someone who is betraying the country for a Silicon Valley techie. On the contrary I had a completely different experience with the official stamping my documents at the U.S. airport. His friendly mannerisms and conversations regarding my education made me so much more comfortable than I had felt back home. Anyways, the point is that the Indian immigration officials mistreat most Indians as a matter of protocol with no public opposition but Indians can’t tolerate the national leaders and celebs being mistreated by the immigration officials abroad. Is this about national pride or national ego?
The Jaswant Singh episode is equally confusing. In 2005, BJP leader L.K. Advani was criticized for referring to Jinnah as a secular leader. Four years Jaswant Singh is facing a similar situation for stating that Jinnah was not wholly responsible for the partition of India. For decades Jinnah has been portrayed as the villain in history books. A simple reading of the Indian National Movement in the post Quit India phase is like a Bollywood movie where Mahatma Gandhi, the hero, battles to save the unity of India from the evil intentions of Jinnah. Jaswant Singh’s assertions (purely academic according to him) seem to have challenged this projection of characters in black and white with a tinge of grey. The BJP has formally distanced itself from the book and no other political leader is likely to side with Jaswant Singh. Is this about national history or historical bias?
Self-criticism and self-evaluation are as critical for national progress as for individual development. But a sense of narcissism has clouded the critical instincts of Indians as a nation. We carry too many opinions and hold them too sacred. Have Indians not become too touchy and opinionated?