History of marketing in India

Contemporary concepts and practices of marketing, and the ideologies which impel these, originate from the social and economic contexts of the West, particularly the United States and Europe (Ellis et al., 2011; Eckhardt et al., 2013). As a consequence of this Western dominance, the marketing discipline became permeated with values such as individualism and rationalism (Ellis et al., 2011). The Eurocentrism of much of marketing theory has resulted in knowledge pertinent to contexts such as India being overlooked (Varman and Saha, 2009; Varman and Sreekumar, 2015). In an early paper that appeared in the Journal of Marketing, Westfall and Boyd, Jr. (1960) suggested that marketing practices in India were not sufficiently ‘developed’, and called for a ‘modernization’ of marketing in India. In response to such criticism, marketing academics in India adopted theories and practices of marketing from the West, especially the US. Not surprisingly, these theories and practices were often far removed from the realities of the Indian economy and consumers (Varman et al., 2011). This is particularly ironic because India, like many other parts of the world, has a rich history of markets and marketing. There is clearly a need to bridge this gap in our knowledge and understanding about the rest of the world. This chapter on history of marketing in India addresses this lacuna in the discipline

The roots of punitive damages at common law: a longer history

This Article aims to revisit the historical development of the doctrine ofexemplary or punitive damages. Punitive damages are anomalous in that they lie in both tort and crime, a matter that has led to much criticism by modern commentators. Yet, a definitive history of punitive damages does not exist to explain this anomaly. The main contribution of this Article, then, is to begin such a history by way of a meta-narrative. It identifies and links the historically significant moments that led to punitive damages, beginning with the background period of classical Roman law, its renewed reception in Western Europe in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries that coincided with the emergence of the English common law,the English statutes of the late thirteenth century, to the court cases of Wilkes v. Wood and Huckle v. Money in the eighteenth century that heralded the "first explicit articulation" of the legal principle of punitive damages. This Article argues that this history is not linear in nature but historically contingent. This is a corrective to present scholarship, which fails to adequately connect or contextualize these historical moments, or over-simplifies this development over time.

Eurocentrism and the history of democracy

Building atop these earlier works, this article offers a fresh critique of the work of Dunn and other political scientists and historians who have propagated the Eurocentric history of democracy. The papers argues that such work can be dissected and critiqued along several key lines: their reliance on a distinctly patriarchal discourse riddled with prejudices; the assertion that one can understand the history of democracy via the etymology of the word itself; and the deeply Eurocentric roots of the study of democracy’s past embedded in the canon of Western political thought. The paper concludes by calling on contemporary political scientists and political historians concerned with the history of democracy to be careful in re-iterating this deeply flawed history of democracy and to instead work towards a history of democracy that retrieves the silenced histories and the forgotten democratic moments that lay behind the roar of Western power.