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

Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 192 posts

Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California

#71

Post by whatsup7123 »

theogravity wrote: post #5

> “not only target and racially profile South Asian Californians, but will put other California residents and businesses at risk and jeopardize our state’s innovative edge.” How? Because south asians can't be caste-ist against others now?

I think the fear is that sb403 would have ended up with a lot of allegations of caste discrimination when there was none, specifically in situations where bitter employees are upset about not being promoted (for example) and are desperate to find a reason for anything but their performance. This sounds harsh, but I'm trying to explain the reasoning.

Take a look at the Cisco case (tmk the only known legal case of caste discrimination in California). The case was dropped with prejudice because the allegations were found to be lies. Tech industry was afraid of this kind of situation being widespread.

Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California

#72

Post by addicted »

olliej wrote: post #39
tpmoney wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether or not it is already accounted for under existing law, this sort of reasoning is about as valid as "the large and vocal constituency against a bill requiring everyone to pledge allegiance to the US is evidence that people aren't loyal to the country" Better evidence would be someone who would have been eligible to bring a case under the new law having been denied justice under the existing laws.

You mean the many documented examples of caste discrimination who have been unable to do anything because caste discrimination is legal?

The California govt is literally suing Cisco for caste based discrimination. They clearly don’t think it’s legal.

Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California

#73

Post by theogravity »

huytersd wrote: post #64
function_seven wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They would be the only group “exposed” to this law. The vast majority of non-Indian people in California have very little idea how caste works, and how to identify membership, etc. So now there’s this new law that de facto only applies to a specific ethnicity of Californians. I guess you could argue that all Californians—regardless of their ethnicity—are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of caste. But to me…

Indians can’t even tell castes unless they are from essentially the same county/local cluster. This is only really a problem because you have a lot of people from the same part of Andra pradesh coming and working in the tech sector.

I thought they can also sometimes identify via last name?

Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California

#76

Post by theogravity »

huytersd wrote: post #52
praveen9920 wrote: post #33

Very unfortunate. I have heard lot of cases from friends in US about how they are discriminated based on caste and they can’t say anything because of backlash they might face. Unfortunately, Unlike other kind of discrimination, caste based discrimination is hard to prove in courts. And on top of that they have to prove that caste based discrimination is illegal too, making it hard to bring justice.

Who even knows someone’s caste in the US. As an Indian living in the US for 20 years, I have never once even heard it come up in any conversation even in passing. How would you even tell? I grew up in India and I can’t tell.

My wife is South Indian, and her dad is a very proud Brahmin (I think that's the highest on the pole). He has mentioned it at least once or twice at some point when I was around him. We do not know if he discriminates anyone based on their caste or not, but he is a hardcore traditionalist.

(I realize this is an anecdote and it doesn't speak for anyone else).

Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California

#77

Post by gnicholas »

whatsup7123 wrote: post #66
ethanbond wrote: post #2

The large and vocal constituency activated against the bill is good evidence that in fact it is not already accounted for under existing civil rights law.

It is accounted for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_Civil_Rights_Act "...the unlawful discrimination is in part based on a person's sex, race, color, religion, * ancestry* ..."

That appears to cover consumers, but doesn’t cover employees. Is there another law that also refers to ancestry that applies in the employment context?

Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California

#78

Post by addicted »

catlover76 wrote: post #68
emmelaich wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a vast array of prejudices and grievances in most cultures. Are you going to enumerate them all? I reminded of that scene in "Mad Men" where Pete Campbell is denied a sale by a McDonald. You know, because of the 1692 Massacre at Glencoe and related. https://www.ccsna.org/the-campbells-and-macdonalds . Then there is the Balkans ....

I'm not sure if you noticed, but there are already legal protections for discrimination on basis of race and religion. > There's a vast array of prejudices and grievances in most cultures. Are you going to enumerate them all? Are you going to enumerate them all in defense of caste discrimination on the faulty logic that we have to eliminate every other possible injustice before we tackle caste discrimination?

What would cover discrimination based on religion if religion was not in that list?

The argument here is that ancestry already covers caste so it’s unnecessary.

Adding caste, assuming Newsom’s argument is correct, would then be the equivalent of adding religious denomination because an Evangelical Christian is concerned a Catholic is discriminating against them.

And most likely that would never even see the light of day because people would reasonably argue that’s already covered under discrimination based on religion.

Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California

#79

Post by finite_depth »

emmelaich wrote: post #44
ethanbond wrote: post #2

The large and vocal constituency activated against the bill is good evidence that in fact it is not already accounted for under existing civil rights law.

There's a vast array of prejudices and grievances in most cultures. Are you going to enumerate them all? I reminded of that scene in "Mad Men" where Pete Campbell is denied a sale by a McDonald. You know, because of the 1692 Massacre at Glencoe and related. https://www.ccsna.org/the-campbells-and-macdonalds . Then there is the Balkans ....

[dead]

Re: Newsom vetoes a proposed ban on caste discrimination in California

#80

Post by whatsup7123 »

strangesmells02 wrote: post #7

How populated with Indian people is California if statewide legislation is being written for this?

Caste discrimination is not limited to the Indian population. As a matter of fact, ancestral caste is not a concept introduced by Hinduism or Indian culture (look up "varna", which is native to Hinduism and is not necessarily assigned by ancestry).

The word "caste" itself derives from the Portuguese words "casta".

Post reply on HN