111–120 of 324 posts
Great, good luck enforcing that. Good luck even verifying caste identity. The last name is not even close to 100% valid in determining caste identity. Also, I think whether we admit it or not, we definitely have a notion of caste in the west except it’s a combination of race and socioeconomic identity. Growing up my white friends had a whole network of friends with summer homes and we once took a tour around the USA…
Great, good luck enforcing that. Good luck even verifying caste identity. The last name is not even close to 100% valid in determining caste identity. Also, I think whether we admit it or not, we definitely have a notion of caste in the west except it’s a combination of race and socioeconomic identity. Growing up my white friends had a whole network of friends with summer homes and we once took a tour around the USA…
Class divide is not caste divide.
Imagine if you went to the market, and you touched someone, and immediately, their parents/people around them flicked drops of water at them to purify them because they got touched by an untouchable. Do you experience THAT in the US? Do you know how humiliating that is?
You're being absurd at equating the two.
As someone completely ignorant in this cultural phenomenon, given it seems to be hurting some people what are the arguments for not banning it as discrimination? (I was hoping to read at least one in the article, but perhaps I'm blind?)
OTOH I dislike the idea of adding caste to protected status because that affects people who have nothing to do with this. The US has no history of caste discrimination and most people have no idea what that is. So I am opposed to equating American concepts of discrimination that were based in things like Jim Crow laws and slavery with caste discrimination. I am opposed to things like corporate DEI hiring practices and school admissions policies incorporating caste because this places an undue burden on the majority of Americans who are not involved with this.
If I have to count the number of times someone senior to me or some colleague has judged me or severed ties with me because of my caste, it will be 8-10. All in the United States. If anything it’s far worse here than when I grew up in India. I’m not of the “lowest caste” as it’s perceived but by looks I am often mistaken to be a Brahmin, one of the highest ones. So my fellow Brahmins get offended when I’m not strictl…
This California law from 1959 already bans discrimination by ancestry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_Civil_Rights_Act From a legal perspective, is a new law even necessary? Isn't it legally redundant?
Perhaps this was tested in court with a caste discrimination case and it wasn't clear enough that it applied. I don't know CA case law enough. Based on the article I have the impression that this law originated from insiders in the legal system so I assume it's necessary to call out caste by name.
This has nothing to do with civil rights, it’s just a continuation of colonialism and the rich white man’s “divide and conquer” ideology. They have Modi, Sunak, Vivek is coming, and pretty much every executive team of every major tech company is dominated by people from the Indian subcontinent. Let’s not be fooled here folks, this is cultural oppression and warfare in a hidden form. Why else of all people is Wahab dr…
>Vivek is coming
Vivek ain't gonna go nowhere.
----------
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's ridiculous though, that's like saying that the 13th amendment assured the longevity of slavery since it was never as explicitly defined in the Constitution.
Try to divorce the concept from the specific issue. It's not ridiculous, on it's face. It's one aspect of history, that seems to hold true. The concept of a belief being promoted by enshrining it in writing, is not a truth, but a matter of circumstance. eg Any religious writings.
Certainly writing things down can make it easier for concepts to stick around, but I don't think the dynamics are the same for something written down to call out that it's bad. And holy texts are a totally different ballgame.
This has nothing to do with civil rights, it’s just a continuation of colonialism and the rich white man’s “divide and conquer” ideology. They have Modi, Sunak, Vivek is coming, and pretty much every executive team of every major tech company is dominated by people from the Indian subcontinent. Let’s not be fooled here folks, this is cultural oppression and warfare in a hidden form. Why else of all people is Wahab dr…
Is that a rhetorical question? because I have no idea what it's supposed to mean.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Analogy here would be, I’m saying I almost got robbed, robbery is real. You’re coming and saying, “this new law won’t solve your issue, it’s for actual robbery only.”
Sorry, maybe I misunderstood. Can you describe a specific incident in your employment history where you were fired from a job or denied a promotion due to your caste or ancestry? You should be able to sue for this right now (even before SB403) with this law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_Civil_Rights_Act
Just clarifying that discrimination doesn't have to result in being fired or passed over for a promotion to count as discrimination.
> a proposal that many felt was unnecessary and unfairly tarnished the image of the South Asian community I'm white yet I don't feel "unfairly tarnished" by the banning of white supremacy. Nevertheless, plenty of Americans (mostly but not exclusively white) do oppose legislative constraints on white supremacy and I think it's fair to say that they "feel tarnished" by them. My read is that this opposition comes from t…
Difference being that discrimination by race is already illegal and therefore banning white supremacy amounts to limiting speech. Banning white supremacy would be equivalent to banning support of caste discrimination, which is different from banning caste discrimination itself.