Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 656 posts

Re: Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

#621

Post by nandhinianand »

mrweasel wrote: post #163
nandhinianand wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a friend whose parents converted to christianity, and so my friend grew up christian. But guess what, the first time I met my friends' mom(at his wedding), the first question she asked after verifying native state(TamilNadu) was which caste I belonged to. (And yeah just to be clear, she asked which caste I'm from, and she/they're from xxx caste). So no caste is not something people escape from converting relig…

I’m sorry but I’m completely facinated. What do you suppose would happen if your answer was something like: “Oh, we don’t believe in castes” or “I’m not in any caste”. I assume they’d just assume the “worst”.

Okay few pointers, there's a bunch of dialects in the language that vary mostly based on which sub-part we come from. In turn, most sub-parts have one or other caste majority, additionally, people take a guess based on looks, accent and choice of vocabulary too.. So she'd assume something and keep moving on..

Re: Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

#622

Post by nandhinianand »

TuringNYC wrote: post #175
mrweasel wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry but I’m completely facinated. What do you suppose would happen if your answer was something like: “Oh, we don’t believe in castes” or “I’m not in any caste”. I assume they’d just assume the “worst”.

If the person is so forward with this, isnt that a good filter (of sorts) to avoid a specific person who will judge you by such things rather than your character? I've had this happen with people trying to figure out wealth based on very specific questions regarding where my parents live, etc -- I run the other way. Better to know sooner than later right? Two of my best friends are Indian Americans, and our friendshi…

> If the person is so forward with this, isnt that a good filter (of sorts) to avoid a specific person who will judge you by such things rather than your character?

Sure do note, this is a friends' mom so atleast a couple of decades older than me.. I've a good friendship with her son, so i guess it's just a question of being polite with her and limiting spending time with her.

Re: Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

#623

Post by oarla »

pkphilip wrote: post #599
yumraj wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. Reservation is the real problem (no it's not) Of course Reservation IS the problem if you're unfortunate to be an upper caste. The problem is that a caste-based reservation did NOT eliminate caste-based bias, it amplified it. More and more castes, outside the original designation, demanded it in exchange for votes, and more and more upper caste Indians felt cheated as they lost limited opportunities that should…

This article by Yashica Dutt is very relevant in this conversation: Does upper caste society acknowledge the private reservations it has had for years? https://scroll.in/article/951818/does-upper-caste-society-ac... As a person from an upper caste background may I ask you why you think the criteria for reservation should be economic when the bias is because of caste? I know multiple friends of mine who have suffered…

"As a person from an upper caste background may I ask you why you think the criteria for reservation should be economic when the bias is because of caste?"

Quote from the article you have provided: "With money. Somebody who does not have access to money does not have access to “merit”."

And I agree with Yashica Dutt's analysis. It is true that irrespective of caste, if you have enough financial power, you can change your circumstances, particularly in India. Hence, it makes sense to have an affirmative action that benefits those who are economically underprivileged, than on basis of birth.

Re: Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

#624

Post by MisterBastahrd »

gandutraveler wrote: post #588
MisterBastahrd wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it really is not more complicated. The US has its own implicit systems of discrimination. The white racist from Tennessee is going to be looked down upon by the white racist from Connecticut who will be looked down upon by the white racist with a Central Park apartment. Affirmative action is not "always bad." There are multiple purposes of affirmative action, some of which have NOTHING to do with the individual s…

Isn't it racist when lower cast employee hires another lower cast employee. Arent we trying to stop that very same thing with AA?

Not remotely, no. The entire purpose of AA is to try to bring normalization to a system that is heavily and unfairly biased. AA has an understanding of the network effect and peoples' bias built in. Lower caste people favoring lower caste associates is a feature, not a bug. You want them to hire more people like them to help bring the group up. This doesn't always work, of course, but that's not the point. You want to increase the probability that it will happen

No high achievers are truly worried about being in a system with AA with regards to their personal employment and advancement. They're going to succeed regardless. The high caste people who are waiting for their (or are waiting for their kids') handout simply because they had good grades as a child are the ones who are the complainers.

It's not perfect, but it's not resource intensive and it's vastly better than the alternative.

Re: Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

#625

Post by wishinghand »

tjs8rj wrote: post #544
wishinghand wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it's a sign of being sheltered. Kind of like white people in the USA not knowing of their privilege.

Except my caste clearly has distinct disadvantages whereas "white privilege" is justified with unequal outcomes. There's causation with caste, but poor justification beyond correlation with "white privilege" other than the so often repeated but flawed study about call-back rates being higher for white candidates. In other words: caste-based discrimination is real, and white privilege just seems like a ghost

Are you saying that because white privilege is less acknowledged, it's harder to grasp for those within and without it? Or that it's existence is dubious?

Re: Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

#626

Post by srean »

legolas2412 wrote: post #617
srean wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Bengali I can assure me there are many like me from Bengal who don't. Bengal for whatever reasons seemed to have solved this way better than other states.

I don't either. You'll have to get a better sample representing bengali villages and older people to conclude that casteism is dead.

As I had mentioned in my other comment, our grandparent generation holds on to some aspect and that it is stronger in villages. But having travelled through India extensively, the kind that goes on in Bengal is no comparison to say Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka. That's the reason you will politicians have caste centric campaigns and manifestos. In Bengal, politicians know that caste will not get them votes, BJP is trying its level best to split the vote along caste lines.

Re: Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

#627

Post by colinmhayes »

tw600040 wrote: post #415
colinmhayes wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is growing up with extreme discrimination not relevant?

Depends. So who should win the 100 m olympics? someone who is fastest or someone who was discriminated against? Which team should win the football match? the team that scores the most points or should the background of the players be a criteria?

Admissions aren't about winning the race, they're about institutions deciding who has the most potential to win. In that way they are comparable to sporting drafts where people are absolutely chosen over better players because the team believes they have greater potential.

Re: Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

#628

Post by mavelikara »

sharadov wrote: post #407
pm90 wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To right historical wrongs is not easy. I initially thought of the reservation system as a terrible idea because of exactly the reasons you stated. These policies are meant to help society in aggregates so there will always be folks who get screwed. Its important to keep trying though. While slavery in the US is perhaps 300 years old, the caste system has been seemingly around since the beginning of civilization on t…

It was meant as repatriation of resources back to the downtrodden, as all well meaning ideas start off.... True, am not against that, but without checks and balances, as as happened in India, it ends up creating another set of problems ( poor Brahmins now complain of lack of opportunities). The caste system was not as rigid before, it was more a system around professions ( Brahmins - intellectual class, the Kshatriya…

  pm90> These policies are meant to help society in aggregates so there will always be folks who get screwed. Its important to keep trying though.

  sharadov> True, am not against that, but without checks and balances, as as happened in India, it ends up creating another set of problems (poor Brahmins now complain of lack of opportunities).
Reservation policy should not be confused with financial assistance. The government does have financial assistance in many forms, which is available to everyone needy - brahmins included. Reservation policy is for correcting imbalances in the aggregate, such as the one pointed out by a sibling comment:

  esalman> What is more unfair? One 25,000-ranked dalit student getting favored over a 5,000 -ranked brahmin, or the fact that 25% of IIT students do not represent dalits even though they represent 25% of the whole population?
Poor brahmins, in your example, complain because small dents in institutionalized privileges one enjoys is indistinguishable from oppression.

Re: Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

#629

Post by nunb »

tracker1 wrote: post #614
sudoaza wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true for most countries, how many developers do you know that come from real poor families? In my experience most had it pretty good, that's why they had a computer and maybe internet growing up, and time to play with it, and time to study instead of working to support yourself and the family.

No computer, no internet growing up, but then again, I was born in '74. If I were to guess, probably grew up in the bottom 30% or so. Never had a "new" car growing up, always rented (though my parents did finally 'buy' when I was around 25 or so). Didn't put down on a house of my own until about 2 years ago (43yo at the time). That said, I've had a tendency to spoil myself since I started making good money over a dec…

Interesting ramble and thank you for sharing. I would be curious to hear more about the interesting interactions based on the caste they grew up in!

  I will say that of the people from other cultures that I've worked with in my life, those from India tend to have more interesting interactions based on the caste they grew up in. The variance is far broader than most...

Re: Over 90% of Indian techies in the US are upper-caste Indians

#630

Post by ponker »

Caylio wrote: post #594
ponker wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t have any expertise here, but “no it’s not” is not an argument, regardless of how loud you say it.

The same could be said about your comment.

Of course. I am not refuting the point, only highlighting that none was actually made. The deficiency of the argument by trying a more obvious statement of fact. “Two plus two isn’t five, it’s just not.” Agree with you, cap’n. “Two plus two isn’t four... it’s just not.” Um, okay.
Post reply on HN