India in Anglosphere ?

I was going through instapundit archives (a very good way to waste time) searching for "India" references.
While his as well other bloggers he quoted held India favourably, one of the amusing opinion was that India is in Anglosphere.
This opinion is closely related to what Manmohan Singh expressed in his Oxford Speech and the subsequent discussion in blogosphere.
Now I don't agree with it, but discussion on it will be really long (as was on the other topic), so I will just push some tentative ideas.
First of al l the question is why India is to be included in Anglosphere, the answer can be
1) We were ruled by british.
2) Our educated and elite identify themselves with British ethos (for which Manmohan Singh thanked our erstwhile masters, in my view incorrectly)

Now in order to rebutt this point, consider this
British ruled on , in addition to India, many other regions , including almost half of africa, most of the middle east, Pakistan, Bangladesh and few "chiller" here and there.

BUT of all those former colonies only India is sought to be included in "Anglosphere", the reason in my view, is that among all the colonies only India has been relatively stable and moderately successful (or more precisely tolerably mediocre).

This is what is called selective data to suit your theory. And what this theory is ? That the counteries which came under Anglo-Saxon influence have made considerable progress or in other words british rule had an overall benificial result.
The other colonies are excluded because it shows this thoery in ridiculous light (which it is).

I am sure the elites in India closely identify themselves with british ethos, but not surprisingly so do elites of every british colony (not surprisingly as they are in spirit WOGS or as RSS loves to put it Macaulites).

Supporter of "India in Anglosphere" will point out that most of our political class was, and still is, influenced by british ethos. Here again if we consider that most of the former colonies had atleast, in the begining a political class which identified with british ideal esp. that of fabian socialism or even communism. Jinnah and early pakistani leaders were almost Anglophiles, however democracy could not get popular currency in Pakistan, my thoughts on why this happened will require another post.

However it was not as if democracy was not subverted in India by Nehru dynasty.
Emergency is without doubt greatest example of what Nehry family is capable, but the way Nehru family subverted sprit of federalism (deliberate use of article 356, using governor houses as centre of intrigues) to supress any threat to their authority, is as much serious , if not more, as emergency.

What is more BJP and affliated groups ,which I support and which is favourite Bogeyman of secular media has shown as much commitment , towards democracy, if not more, as any "secular outfit" will.

I suspect that as India ascends the power circles, there will clamour for it to include it in Anglosphere, I also think that many if not all elites (like "Jerry Rao") in India will also favour this , in fact they already favour this.
In my opinion, India should resist this "temptation" (of being among white boys).
The reason for this is India has an independent culture and history.
What is more, while it is not perfect, it is more than equal to western civilizations.

Abandoning our civilization and rejecting the underpining ideals for "a place in big league", will not only not get us what we desire, it will also leave us a caricature of our past.

The correct way for us in my opinion should be to accept or reject any idea on its merit and not because of its "cool quotient", I am afraid that I am a rare minority.