The article attributes this characteristic with Buddhism and collectivism without much comparative evaluation, and I find the explanation utterly unconvincing.

The article attributes this characteristic with Buddhism and collectivism without much comparative evaluation, and I find the explanation utterly unconvincing. For if it is Buddhism and communalism that led to such societal behavior, why is it that its neighboring largely Buddhist and largely collectivist East Asian and South-East Asian neighbors don't exhibit such characteristics? A proper argument in terms of "cultural history" needs to account for comparative evidence. Interestingly when I encounter this kind of sloppy "cultural history" reasoning it is from a BBC article.