Earlier quoted context omitted.
except for the flawed assumption that this happened due to some class problem - I agree with your argument.
OK. It's not an assumption, it's my theory as to why this happened.
Which is wrong.
Having a Servant Is Not a Right
221–230 of 235 posts
Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right
#222First things first, as an Indian,
Ms. Khobragade if she exploited the maid is in the wrong. The rich and the powerful do get away with a lot in India, which to the chagrin of Ms. Khobragade, she found out was not the case elsewhere.
Most of the criticism we see in India about US actions and support for Ms. Khobragade isn't necessarily that. There are a couple of concerns which largely underlie the anger
(a) US diplomats (and diplomats of other nations) enjoy many privileges in India. These privileges are reciprocal and India feels that this reciprocity was not available when dealing with Ms. Khobragade. Older folks like my father who was a government officer for his entire working life understand that she should be prosecuted, they only expect an apology for the treatment meted out to Ms. Khobragade during and after the arrest, which is not forthcoming.
This reciprocity extends to looking the other way when granting permits and licenses such as those for importing liquor, visa for same sex couples, which is a grey area in Indian penal code and many other benefits which are not all clearly legal.
(b) US actions to grant visa and arrange for Ms. Sangeeta Richards and family be flown out of India despite requests by Indian government, which provided US with details of a missing persons/absconding report having been filed in India, undermine Indian Judiciary. The undercurrent claim, Ms. Richards would not be served justice in India.
It is debatable whether Ms. Richards would have justice served in India, what is not debatable is the wrong doing of the US to publicly undermine the Indian judiciary. Ms. Richards is an Indian citizen and needs to pursue cases under the Indian law.
(c) There has been for a time now, a proposal to contract and place positions like those of Ms. Richards directly under the preview of the Indian government. This proposal had not been approved by the parliament yet, however the US department of state was aware of this. It is expected to be approved and when it does pass the parliament, Ms. Richards would be paid wages in India and would be free to accept or decline the offered pay. Ms. Richards was in a similar situation and was free to return to India if she considered herself exploited.
This is the gray area reciprocity that India extends to US diplomats and expects the same in return.
Ms. Khobragade is a smoke screen for why India feels wrong.
Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
The elephant in the room with all this is that America has its own big problems in this area. The illegal immigrant workers from Mexico and other places seem to have issues with wages, employment rights and other things. Let's not even talk about the big daddy of them all on the corporate side, Walmart with its wage issues. So, before Americans start feeling smug about how they set the standards for the rest of the w…
"So, before Americans start feeling smug about how they set the standards for the rest of the world, please look in your own back yard." That's a very tired criticism/complaint. The points made were fair and if you don't think so then argue those points. Making generalizations that Americans should not share their thoughts on injustices outside the ones our government, corporations, and/or citizens create is absurd.…
actually - the world would actually better off if everyone cleaned their own backyards before poking into their neighbours business!
Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right
#224While this diplomat person as an individual is none too commendable (back home in India she is involved in some questionable property dealings [1]) - there is much more to the story than this shallow but seemingly introspective "article". The lady (servant - according to the article) was brought in on an authorized "Au pair" visa. Indian Diplomats in the US are paid little in-terms of monetary benefits. Most compensa…
Your response perfectly illustrates the flawed attitude the author was describing. Can you not hear yourself? You are calling another human being a "perk"!!! Enough with the semantic arguments: 1. Calling a servant an "au pair" or a "perk" doesn't make her less of a human being. 2. ALL human beings have rights, and in the US those rights include employment protections, such as a minimum wage. 3. It doesn't matter wha…
why are you so stunned that people can be inhumane? Have you looked into how all those clothes you rushed so madly to buy on black friday are so dirt cheap? Or that iphone? There are people in the west who are equally or even more inhumane - being distant from the inhumanity is just washing your hands off it. Make statements like those - if you're someone who only buys things produced fairly and the makers of which pay minimum wages to their employees - otherwise you're as inhumane as the next guy - but just have the luxury of being able to ignore it and feel good for yourself because you're not directly involved.
Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right
#225While this diplomat person as an individual is none too commendable (back home in India she is involved in some questionable property dealings [1]) - there is much more to the story than this shallow but seemingly introspective "article". The lady (servant - according to the article) was brought in on an authorized "Au pair" visa. Indian Diplomats in the US are paid little in-terms of monetary benefits. Most compensa…
American here. Watching this case intermittently, it's a little hard to fathom the seething anger in India. The matter seems fairly straightforward: - Rule of law applies, regardless the person; that's the theory, anyway. In practice, the laws tend to favor the wealthy and powerful; but whatever gets into the books tends to be applied as resources permit. In other words, this had nothing to do with the fact that the…
> Recall the reckless young American that went around and broke a bunch of car windows in Singapore sometime back. Americans were all upset that he was caned. But on one level, it was quite fair -- any Singaporean would have received the same punishment, and Singapore did not budge on the rule.
I remember when that happened. There were some Americans who were upset that the young man was going to be caned, but there were plenty of other Americans who wholeheartedly approved of the caning and wished we had in here in this country.
Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
"So, before Americans start feeling smug about how they set the standards for the rest of the world, please look in your own back yard." That's a very tired criticism/complaint. The points made were fair and if you don't think so then argue those points. Making generalizations that Americans should not share their thoughts on injustices outside the ones our government, corporations, and/or citizens create is absurd.…
actually - the world would actually better off if everyone cleaned their own backyards before poking into their neighbours business!
That is probably true, but it is totally unrealistic. Should we all remain silent in the face of such abuses until we have made our own "backyards" clean?
"...only those without sin should cast the first stone. [This] is so relativistic and "nonjudgmental" that it would not allow the prosecution of Charles Manson. Our few notions of justice have had to evolve despite these absurd codes of ultra vindictiveness and ultracompassion." - Christopher Hitchens
Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hope you understand that this is not an actual law, but a piece of satire describing social norms in a smaller provincial town in the beginning of the twentieth century. This was a very different and much more traditional and hierarchical society, and the attitudes bitops describe more stem from the reaction against these norms which happened in the 60ies and 70ies.
Nonetheless, these statutes even if only adhered by a small population of Denmark and Scandinavia are repulsive and eminently worthy of disparage. This is not what a technologically progressive society would want more of.
Totally agree! Interesting though that Denmark has better social mobility than the US, even though Denmark has historical attitudes like the Law of Jante, while the US have "The American Dream."
Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right
#228Earlier quoted context omitted.
wow yet another westerner sitting on their high horse of "we know what's right for you" - the caste system has little or nothing to do with this. And these steps are far from as trivial as you make them sound. If the biggest economy of the world is totally failing at preventing homelessness and sky high medical costs - do you really think its that easy for India which for all means and purposes has only truly started…
I am not sure if you were responding to me. But I just wanted to clarify that I think those steps are very difficult indeed. I don't think it's trivial at all to implement the changes I listed, and would take time. And that minimum wage can only be properly implemented once you get a lot of the other problems resolved.
I understand - the bullet point format you took on just made it sound like "damn why dont these guys just get it right"...
Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hope you understand that this is not an actual law, but a piece of satire describing social norms in a smaller provincial town in the beginning of the twentieth century. This was a very different and much more traditional and hierarchical society, and the attitudes bitops describe more stem from the reaction against these norms which happened in the 60ies and 70ies.
Nonetheless, these statutes even if only adhered by a small population of Denmark and Scandinavia are repulsive and eminently worthy of disparage. This is not what a technologically progressive society would want more of.
[deleted]
Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right
#230What a piece of crap link-bait. The actual title of the article should have been the last sentence of her piece: "Having a servant you cannot pay a decent wage cannot be a birthright".