Live data from Hacker News

Having a Servant Is Not a Right

nytimes.com

231–235 of 235 posts

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#231
The real curse of India is the hindu caste system. Here in India it's something like "you shall not name it, or say it". Everyone knows it's the real cause, but no one says it or worse tries to generalise and hide it in other words. For every single Devayani, or K.R.Narayanan (who was made the president of India), there are lakhs and lakhs of untold unspeakable cruelty and suffering and that is the true ratio.

International readers would get the real picture of India if they skim through local hindi newspapers (especially states of Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar) using Google translator everyday to know about the real India and the real hindu caste system, instead of relying on sugar-coated and watered-down reality and wonderland being churned by cunning authors or Bollywood.

Here the issue is simple. It's a matter of protocols and rights. It was about nations. But even the cunning author (like the other snakes in India) brought in the hindu caste factor, perhaps for a good reason. You know the kind of sly hint to the upper caste NRIs that she's not one of us, so lie low for now and pretend to be good in the eyes of the US.

The low castes (untouchables) are making headway in India not due to any empathy of the hindu caste system and hinduism but due to their becoming aware of the sheer strength of their numbers and the power of organisation. So much so that even karma and dharma have been flushed down the latrines, and people have begun to realise and make their own destiny and bright future. And the best part is that, hinduism no more has the balls to assert or speak about its true philosophy and values but is forced to hide itself in the "progressive" sheep cloth.

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#233
post #231

The real curse of India is the hindu caste system. Here in India it's something like "you shall not name it, or say it". Everyone knows it's the real cause, but no one says it or worse tries to generalise and hide it in other words. For every single Devayani, or K.R.Narayanan (who was made the president of India), there are lakhs and lakhs of untold unspeakable cruelty and suffering and that is the true ratio. Intern…

http://archive.tehelka.com/story_main13.asp?filename=Cr07300...

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're making 10x as much as a farm worker, including benefits, then doesn't that mean they're already making a living wage? A minimum wage probably wouldn't affect them significantly in that case. But is the article wrong then? Why would someone with 10x the income of a farm worker villager live in a shanty town without water?

because that's living in big cities unfortunately. Taking Bombay as an example - where in some areas the cost per square foot of an apartment is easily as high as 1600 USD (100000 INR) - even a shanty is a luxury for many. Also you have to realize - a village in india != a village in the developed world. Likely his shanty has tv, water for a few hours a day that fill up an overhead tank and has a doctor nearby - all…

What is life in the village like? I'll admit my first reaction upon reading this is to think "that doesn't sound very pleasant" but maybe it's a lot better relative to where this person came from. Why are people moving to the city?

Re: Having a Servant Is Not a Right

#235
post #148
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what you may not be considering here is that there's a broader point being made about what constitutes a "living wage." Of course it's better to get some money rather than nothing. But if the money is below the minimum wage and/or below a living wage, it forces the "servant" to either live close to poverty or work multiple jobs. Also, what's being touched on is a notion of entitlement. For instance, I hire so…

If I offer Joe a job at $2.00 an hour, which is less than the minimum wage, and Joe wants to accept the job, then I have forced Joe to live close to poverty or to work multiple jobs? The offer is voluntary. Joe can either accept it or refuse it. Why doesn't Joe get to say whether he's willing to accept the job or not? I'd say that the government is the entity introducing the use of force into what was otherwise a vol…

The offer is voluntary. Joe can either accept it or refuse it.

I feel like this point is really kind of secondary to the discussion, or at least, it seems like there's an assumption in here that I don't share. For some reason, I feel like maybe there's an assumption that Joe has other options? Maybe I'm missing something.

Post reply on HN