I think non-Indian Americans are shocked that this exists in America, and totally have no idea why this is even a thing. How can I discriminate based on something I don't understand. My Indian best friend told me he's in the warrior caste, when I asked him about the caste system, but I have no idea the hierarchy or how someone would discriminate based upon it.
An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve
181–190 of 324 posts
Re: An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
caste has no direct analog in U.S. or European culture. I mean, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Brahmin as one of many, many examples.
"Boston Brahmin" doesn't capture any of the subtleties of caste, nor is it long lasting. The salience of that group lasted at most two centuties, and most Americans wouldn't immediately place someone named Ted Brinley in that group on hearing the name. Exogamy was rampant. The same things are not at all true of a Brahmin.
nor is it long lasting.
Good point, there’s no such thing as old money, or legacy admissions, or even good old-fashioned racism in America. We left that in the 20th century!
Re: An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, caste has no direct analog in U.S. or European culture. It isn't shocking that a staffer in the California state government would need to be educated about an issue, the first time it's become a political issue in the U.S.
caste has no direct analog in U.S. or European culture. I mean, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Brahmin as one of many, many examples.
It's not a caste in the direct sense. I mean rich people who adopted their cultural practices or married into (which would be hardly even possible in a 'true' caste system) were generally socially accepted.
Of course being Irish/Catholic/Black etc. would've disqualified you but it's not quite the same thing.
Re: An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve
#184This 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…
>Modi, Sunak, Vivek
I bursted out laughing. Imagine comparing major world leaders with some right-wing techbro troll.
Re: An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve
#185Earlier 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.
White Supremacy isn’t a monolithic specifically defined thing. There are certainly kinds of white supremacism protected by the first amendment. For example, the ideas and works of Spengler.
Re: An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve
#186From "LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST" of the bill:
> Existing law, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, provides that all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...
It should be obvious that caste is ancestry, and that the many incidents described are violations of the Unruh Act.
So, there's been a gross failure to enforce this long-existing law. Why? And why is no one involved asking the question?
Re: An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve
#187I don't know if it is editorial bias or not but I could not find a real problem with the bill listed in the article.
Although I don't have all the facts, the article doesn't seem to have much bias to me. They're reporting on why some people disagree with the bill. It doesn't seem to give much leaning in either direction as to whether those people are right or wrong.
Re: An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve
#188I'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…
What's mentioned in the article is that as caste is a primarily SE Asian phenomenon, this is a bill that targets SE Asians. People tend not to like being singled out on the basis of their race. Mentioned in the article was one person who tried to address this by banning discrimination "on the basis of ancestry, including caste" which seems to me to be a completely reasonable adjustment.
Discrimination can be such an umbrella issue. Anything added to that, for example ancestry, has the potential to do more harm than good. What is ancestry? How to prove it? Could a southerner born in Alabama say they were discriminated against colleagues in New York City for his southern ancestry?
Re: An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve
#189As 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?)
I'm only basing this on what I've read in the comments: I can see why people would be against creating another identity group. Labeling people into further and further refined identities and pushing victimhood on people in certain labels has a downside. I don't personally know enough to have a side in this, and I don't live there anyway, just speculating why some might disagree with it. Certainly if we end up with "p…
Protected classes and diversity quotas are nearly unrelated. For example, I have never heard of a hiring quota for people without arms, but they are certainly a protected class.
Re: An effort to ban caste discrimination in California has touched a nerve
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Boston Brahmin" doesn't capture any of the subtleties of caste, nor is it long lasting. The salience of that group lasted at most two centuties, and most Americans wouldn't immediately place someone named Ted Brinley in that group on hearing the name. Exogamy was rampant. The same things are not at all true of a Brahmin.
nor is it long lasting . Good point, there’s no such thing as old money, or legacy admissions, or even good old-fashioned racism in America. We left that in the 20th century!
That's not a direct analogue to the Hindu caste system because at most generation or two were perfectly sufficient to transition to a higher level 'caste'.