151–160 of 324 posts
The amount of damage BS socio-economic systems like caste have done to human dignity is incalculable[1]. Some idiot ages ago (lets call them M) thought it was a good idea to build a system where people could bake in a heirarchy that dictated and guard railed what one could do, be and have. M's f****ery was well recognized by BR Ambedkar(one of the founding fathers of the Constitution) who baked into the constitution…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry but your effort to conflate protected categories and aff am seems completely wrong to me.
To me, it seems that they are very closely related.
Do you generally oppose all race/gender/etc. based anti discrimination laws?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Something like that should be grounds for expulsion IMO.
Impossible to prove tho. You can always just claim you don't like the person for other reasons. That's why this whole 'banning caste' stuff is mostly performative imo. People will just be hostile to each other but not be open with the reason.
That's true. It's also true that there are plenty of professional contexts where people have to work together regardless of their personal feelings toward each other. Sometimes lives depend on it.
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…
Why don't you just come out and say that you want cast discrimination to exists instead of hiding behind all that rhetoric about colonialism?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me, it seems that they are very closely related.
Protected categories = you can't refuse to hire someone because they're not white Affirmative action = you can give someone an advantage in a hiring process because they're not white, with the intention of correcting historical discrimination They are closely related in that they deal with race, gender, and class distinctions. But the ethics of the two are quite different. Banning discrimination by protected categori…
I'm legitimately confused about the strength of opposition to the measure. It seems like it should be a small, uncontroversial, update to protected categories. Are people opposing the term "caste" appearing in U.S. law? Is the concern that the law will cause other Americans to judge Indian/Nepalese/Sri Lankan communities? If anyone here can explain the emotional significance of the bill to someone who is not South As…
It's disappointing that companies lack the ability to deal with this issue in a mature way because having a policy and culture of inclusivity _should_ be enough to address this.
I realize this is all derived from an optimistic viewpoint, but I think it's still worth sharing.
> 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.
I'm saying that I'm not threatened by the existing constraints on white supremacy: not limitations on speech, but the actual bans on discriminatory practices.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I guess I also don't think that speaking directly about a belief makes it stronger, particularly for discrimination. Many people have commented on HN about experiencing caste discrimination but being unable to do anything about it, because Americans have no understanding of what caste discrimination is. "Sunlight is the best disinfectant." Certainly writing things down can make it easier for concepts to stick around,…
> holy texts are a totally different ballgame.
They are not. Historically, written concepts endure longer than unwritten concepts. Again, this is commonly considered self-evident.
> I also don't think that speaking directly about a belief makes it stronger, particularly for discrimination
It may be worth it, but the hyperbole of denying the effect:
eg "How would it extend longevity?"
is the dissonance that I have pointed out.
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…
> just staying in unoccupied summer homes of rich white friends. 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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
White supremacy is not protected speech.