I hope this nonsense can stop and talent can be rewarded regardless of caste.
> This was all very hush-hush, I know of it because I overheard them talking about it.
Of course it is. In India, there are some ridiculuous rules related to caste discrimination. For example someone from "lower" caste can sue a person for libel and have him thrown in jail with no FIR. Caste based discrimination is wrong. But arrest-before-FIR is worse and can destroy someone's life.
Do you know why such a law came into existence? Because of atrocities against "lower" castes which wouldn't even be investigated. But most laws in India end up being misused. (For example dowry harassment laws.)
None of this actually fixes anything. The core problem is poverty and lack of good education. If affirmative action was based on poverty instead of caste and wasn't in terms of hiring/reducing marks but giving out resources to those who lack it, it might have save more lives because currently more rich or upper middle class families benefit from the affirmative action.
10% of country owns approximately 80% of the wealth.
Majority is poor. You don't need to look at the caste.
Anti discrimination laws are important but if we keep focusing on caste, nothing will change if you don't tackle the core problems that is extreme inequality.
I firmly believe the mentality of digging graves for each other is a mindset of poverty and that is what happens in most of India. Scammers exist because scams pay more than real jobs. Stereotypes are formed because some of that disproportionately affect poor communities or specific group. It's a vicious cycle. Poverty makes everyone angry and find reasons to seem better than others. Caste is one of them sometimes when you can't find others.
This is nonsense. As is demonstrated in this thread, even people with similar educational and professional backgrounds are discriminated against on the basis of caste. Since historically the managerial class is dominated by upper castes, the ones being discriminated against are naturally lower castes.
Yes, the reservation system is imperfect and is abused. That doesn’t mean that we replace it with a system that is caste-blind. Rather, incorporate income into it, so that the lower-caste poor ppl get help
No this is looking at the problem superficially. The upper castes feel neglected because there are close to 50% reservation in Government jobs. So they have no choice but to go to private sector. Now they practice undeclared reservation in private sector and not give jobs to the lower castes even if they are equally good and if not better. This is a systemic problem. Each one feels slighted. The lower castes have reservation in Government jobs so upper castes create undeclared reservation in private jobs. Both are harmful to the society!
Even the architect of the Caste-based reservation system Dr. Ambedkar (who is also the architect of the Indian Constitution) said that the Reservation in its current form should only exist for 10 years and not be extended. He contended that 10 years is more than sufficient to have a caste-based reservation. But it kept continuing for 70+ years. It is high time we revamp it to only provide reservation for those who are from low income categories. Doesn't matter which caste they are from. That will actually be helpful.
Caste-based reservation only enforces caste system in India. It doesn't help get rid of it! And it also goes against one of the six Fundamental Rights of Indian Constitution: The Right to Equality. Caste-based reservation violates this Fundamental Right. It was a temporary stop-gap measure which we have made permanent not to upset a section of the Indian society. But it is causing more harm than good. That is a fact!
The upper castes are in a minority of the country. It’s not like they’re inherently better at their jobs, they just have better access to important resources like social capital, economic capital, and education.
I know friends who are from not from upper class and super rich/educated and wealthier but still enjoy the benefits of caste based quota system, while there are people from upper caste and poor and never able to come up through the system. As long as Reservations and Quotas are present - this will prevail. It should be merit based and not caste based.
No other country has such laws. It's against even the basic magna carta principles.
I know about "victims" who lie about the accusitions in these cases, the local community knows that its a lie but people are still guilty until proven innocent.
I disagree with this, even though I faced such discrimination.
P.S That does not mean discrimination does not take place or that there are no genuine complaints.
> Because of atrocities against "lower" castes which wouldn't even be investigated
> I know about "victims" who lie about the accusitions in these cases, the local community knows that its a lie but people are still guilty until proven innocent.
Both of you are offering anecdotes, and I assume the former far outnumbers the latter, but we would find more anecdotes of the latter on HN, because most Indians here are not low-caste.
P.S That does not mean that discrimination does always take place or that there are no false cases.
>The court also referred to data released by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment showing that of the 15,638 cases decided by the courts in 2015, 11,024 resulted in acquittals or discharges. Another 495 cases were withdrawn and only 4,119 cases resulted in convictions.
Unfortunately that doesn't have to mean anything. If the courts are biased it is possible they are only convicting if the evidence is so strong they dare not. Or maybe some courts are honestly decided and others are corrupt...
I'm not in India so I have no idea what the truth is. I do know corruption is a problem there and corruption is a hard problem to solve.
There are in fact preumption-of-validity ("prima facie" evidentiary) laws outside of India. In the case I'm considering these don't directly apply to civil or criminal law, though they operate closely adjacent to these.
We have "prima facie evidentiary" laws in India too. The law the parent is talking about has nothing to do with it. FIR is registered irrespective of whether there is a case made out prima facie or not. That is the biggest problem with this law. It turns the notion of "innocent until proven guilty" over its head.
But that is for property. Does not extend to a human being. That is the same everywhere. You are confusing the two things. Even in India authorities have legal rights to confiscate property they feel is being used in criminal activity. That is allowed and doesn't require a warrant. But do you, in the United States, have any law where you can be arrested without there being a charge-sheet or an arrest warrant or prima-facie evidence? Even the arrests that cops make in the US are based on prima-facie evidence: not providing information as asked for by law, hiding drugs or on the basis of suspicion. No where does anyone get arrested because someone else just complained about the said person.
So, I've been responding to several, often unclear and inconsistent, though absolute claims, made by several commentators in this thread, for which any counterexample would be sufficient refutation.
I'm also not defending the Indian law, only making clear it is not as fully exceptional as portrayed by some here.
Answering your specific question as to the US and detention without charge or due process: yes, definitely. Guantanamo Bay is an extraterritorial detention centre for supposed terrorists, held without trial and subject to torture, since the prison opened in January 2002. 779 prisoners are acknowledged to have been held at some point, 40 remain. I don't find a statement of longest detention, but that could be as much as 18 years.
Tens of thousands of detainees are held by immigration authorities, with nearly 400,000 having been booked into ICE custody in 2018. Detentions are on the basis of (suspected) immigration status, not criminal disposition.
American with a question here. In the U.S. you can legally change your name. What would happen if a Dalit went to court and petitioned to get his named changed to Gupta or Sharma?
The problem is that you need an entire stack of documentation for different sets of paperwork, and that comes with your old name. The only way to get a change done safely in ways that will not show a name change is by getting the name right at birth.
The weaker sections usually need the social support provided by their caste. They are therefore more likely to want to keep it.
It is easy to cosmetically change your caste, in schools if you are not "lower" caste you do not mention anything and you fall into "general category".
On the other hand you need to prove that you are "lower caste". As government benefits follow.
The social movement started several years ago. Its called the quota system and it has been enforced at various levels of government jobs and education. People just get promoted with no regard to their actual performance in all kinds of government jobs. This type of reservation on the basis of caste is regressive. What about someone who is supposedly from a "higher" caste but is still not economically well-off. Such people have to work much harder than their counterparts who receive concessions on their performance. Once you are in the university this doesn't stop. For most government universities the fees are different for people from reserved, non-reserved categories - meaning that someone from a poor background but with "higher" caste label has to work harder for opportunities for education and also has to bear a financial burden once you cross these hurdles. Think from the perspective of a middle class "higher" caste member of society - why should someone like that bear the high tax burden of the country when their kids won't receive much of the benefits. Any talk of scaling back this historical policy screw-up (Mandal comission report / VP Singh government) is vehemently put down. Just look up how the previous government reacted when doctors protested against the extension of caste-based reservation to postgraduate medical education. This is not even partisan. Even in current government one politician said something similar in very derogatory terms leading to him losing in the elections. Reservation should be granted on the basis of economic condition only because the point is economic upliftment. There should be policy that grants economic parity but I don't think the country has resources for satiating revenge.
Fair points. I don't have historical data, but my observation is that the issue of brahmins controlling/dominating lot of sectors was a real problem at some point and the reservation system was a populist response that did provide some benefit for oppressed castes, but created a whole bunch of other problems and unintended consequences. And its still remains such a hot button populist issue no political party would dare implementing the required reforms. The unintended consequence is the emigration of a lot of people from the "higher" castes. I guess its hard to say if it had any material impact on India's progress but the "higher" caste population that doesn't have the means/resources to emigrate is put in a real difficult situation.
iyer or iyengar is their traditional surname probably. same way as a family name in the US. why discriminate against iyers because they want to have a surname of their choice? most folks would be proud of their surnames. Is there a community that feels horrible about their surname?
No, these are not the traditional surnames. What I am referring to is a practice of legally changing the last name (typically father's or grand father's name) to Iyer or Iyengar. To me its a clear on your face statement that the person belongs to that caste and wants to flaunt it.
