Why Brahmins lead Western firms but rarely Indian ones
economist.com
economist.com
* No offense to non-South Asians, it's just those are the folks I worked side by side with in the 00's and saw working multiple jobs and working themselves to death in a foreign land. Certainly this is nothing new in the history of the world, but I feel like the particular angle of their contributions to cell phones and the internet is worthy of a movie or something.
Allowing body shops to sponsor H1B visas is ridiculous and directly leads to this kind of exploitation. Requiring the place where the person actually works to sponsor instead would make so much more sense.
Of course simple reforms like this can never happen because the current debate on immigration in the US is 100% closed borders vs. 100% open borders so the broken status quo continues on.
Yeah, right lmao
The governments make money (guest workers pay taxes and send remittances home), the companies make money and don’t get grief for offshoring, the wages for low/moderate tech skills are suppressed, and the worker gets screwed.
Are you referring to the guest worker here, or the general labor class in the host country? I'd imagine the former gets a substantial net benefit too, relative to the counterfactual in which he's making domestic country wages that are a tiny fraction of his remittance + consumption.
Of course, Trump’s utter indifference, actually attempts to make immigration worse both for immigrants and citizens, was completely predictable.
When I was consulting (not IT), my billable rate was $250/hr and I made $65/hr.
These IT consulting firms should be paying the prevailing wage set out in the H1-B application. If they aren’t they should be prosecuted.
It is a concern.
As much as struggle stories you hear there in the US, they are on top of some next level cheating, privilege and machiavellian play involved in trampling people back home in India and arriving there in US and then acting all fair and merit.
Multiply this with discrimination at every level in office places. This is at many levels religious, class, caste and even linguistic basis.
I've seen the absolute worst of humanity(from Indians to Indians) during my stay there as an Indian immigrant until I returned, its literally dog eat dog.
Prior discussions here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23697083 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24552047 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24952698 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26435117 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24555492 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17531795 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23798922 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24933169 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24065132 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23703325
> I've seen the absolute worst of humanity(from Indians to Indians) during my stay there as an Indian immigrant until I returned, its literally dog eat dog.
I’m not sure what you mean here. You say “its literally dog eat dog”, but the word ‘literally’ has a certain meaning. Are you saying…that your coworkers are dogs and are eating each other? This type of emotional statement makes me view your prior claims with skepticism.
It's a phrase in the english language.
>>Are you saying…that your coworkers are dogs and are eating each other?
Google Search "define dog eat dog"
dog eat dog
phrase of dog
used to refer to a situation of fierce competition in which people are willing to harm each other in order to succeed.Upper caste Hindus lead TECH firms abroad, as they have access to higher education. Commerce castes lead RETAIL businesses back in India. They miss the massive immigration of blue collar Indian workers too.
They do a lot of speculation but completely ignore the business domain aspect, and hence don’t pose a logical answer to the question they themselves present. Quite shoddy journalism.
Scratch but a few inches beneath any of the supposed critiques of this articles, in this thread, and we will find precisely the kind of ingrained casteism that pervades the upper caste mentality, convincing them that they are supposedly meritocratic and superior to the "quota" lower castes.
Casteists are not the intellectual equals of their modern critics and it shows in the way they try to avoid discussion on it.
Makes me wonder if I can trust the Economist to present me an accurate picture on topics I don't know much about.
A similar thing happened with Politico where I read an article about an issue I am very knowledgeable about (H1B visas). It was very opinionated, riddled with factual errors, bad sourcing, incorrect or straight up omitting any data that didn't fit a predefined narrative. You just had to Google a little bit to find the actual data from DOL.
Completely shattered my trust in them and makes me doubt everything they report on, if they couldn't be bothered to enforce basic journalistic standards.
"So why are Indian Brahmins doing better in business abroad? One answer is that because business in India favours those with established networks, talented Brahmins have tended to emigrate. A tradition of bookishness has made it easier for them to pass exams and enter the countries with the greatest opportunities."
Merchant castes don't only lead retail businesses. "A study from 2010 of the country’s 1,000 biggest companies found that some 93% of board members came from “forward” castes."
It’s not surprising that merchant classes that led businesses lead more businesses - not limited to just commerce. But my point was around the examples they gave, and the biggest companies that they named.
I'm sure there are many keralites in the middle east running similar large firms, most of which might not be publicly traded.
Update: Even companies like Patel Brothers, etc.
The last line of the article could give a glimpse into that: <<For the past 18 months a California court has been hearing a suit filed by a Dalit employee at a Silicon Valley firm, demanding compensation alleged discriminatory treatment by higher-caste bosses.>>
When you suddenly see in the last years, a big number of silicon valley CEO to be of Indian origin from the same cast, I can easily think that there is 'relationship' factor that put them there.
Especially considering that most of them are not founders or growth leaders of all these companies.
Because it would be surprising to think that it is just that India produced much more skilled workers than anywhere else to have such high rate of them in SF.
Edit: I don't think it's "explicitly" present. Just the thought in the back of the head: "does the other person still cares about the Caste system, even if they say the doesn't?" is enough to erode social interactions.
Not sure about the US but in Australia I have noticed that the Western born Indians hang out with the natives while the Indians have their own group.
It might not be caste related, it might be language related. Hindi speakers stick together, people from South India who speak other languages form their own group.
Will they try to figure out who my relatives are? How? Would I be asked about relatives in an interview?
What happens if I just shrug and say I’m from city X and I went to school in city Y and here I am?
I understand that those who have lots of social captital have it tied to a network and a place such as a town. They would want to stay in that network to use their capital. For example move back home after studying. But for those with little or even “negative” social capital (ie you are better off with no background than your actual background), why aren’t they more mobile or even just claiming they are?
For tech jobs no one is going to ask these questions.
It's like getting in to american closed society - they'll check your social ties and if noone can vouch for you or know you, you're immediately suspect.
And those checks aren't made in your face - it's usually in the background and async.
It is probably the only undocumented genetic record ever existing in modern times that traces back to probably the beginning of Mankind so to speak. You do not marry within Gotras as it would amount to incestual relationship. Men from Upper Castes were allowed to marry any Woman from Lower Caste but vice-versa was disallowed [1]. However, even the Upper/Lower Caste marriage was frowned upon because of lack of information of Gotras.
Another thing you should note is that Caste System only came into prevalence in the past 2500 years. Before that we had Varna System. In the Varna System, you could "choose" your Profession. If you wanted to be a teacher who was well versed in Vedic scriptures, you would learn under a Guru and become a Brahmin. If you wanted to be a fighter, you would train martial arts and weaponry under a Guru and become a Kshatriya. If you wanted to get into trade you would be a Vaishya. If you wanted to serve the society you would be a Shudra. One more important point to note: In Sanatan Dharma, all are born as Shudras. It is only after the age of 8, when they go through a thread ceremony called Upanayana do they get initiated into Brahmacharya (and then they go on to become Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya etc based on their interests). This is called Dvija (or twice born: first birth was as Shudra and your second birth is into the Varna that you choose). This system was corrupted, especially in the medieval times and turned into "Caste System".
So when you ask if surname can be changed nope it doesn't fix anything. If you want to marry someone you'll have to provide details of your Gotra along with your lineage of your immediate 2 ancestors (typically father and grand-father). And most of these communities are closely knit. So they'll know immediately if you are faking it.
The only remedy is to go back to Varna System and completely abolish the Caste System as it originally was. Where these were considered as Professions alone and not as something that you acquire just by being born into that family. Just like me being born into an Engineers family doesn't automatically make me an Engineer, same way, being born into a Brahmin family won't make me a Brahmin. It will just make me "Brahma-Bandhu". This was the technical term used.
[1] The reason vice-versa was disallowed is because women inherit the man's Gotra after marriage. But the reverse does not happen. Why? Because, the man is the seed giver while the woman is the nourisher. To better explain it: If you consider Mother Earth as woman, and Apple Seed representing the man, if you plant the seed in Earth, you'll have an Apple Tree. Not a Mango Tree. Not a Peach Tree. Earth doesn't get to decide what becomes of the Tree. It only nourishes it. It is the seed which decides the nature/characteristics of the Tree. So Gotra is of the man not the woman. Another reason why we have had a Patriarchal Society for a long time (though this has changed considerably). Because it becomes the responsibility of the man to protect his lineage/clan from external threats.
Keep in mind that these were all done for an era that does not exist today. We cannot fathom the issues/threats they faced that required them to have such systems. Many of it can be taken as is in modern times, while many need to be changed/fixed/removed/abolished. But one good thing is that the system has a self-healing capacity. Slowly but surely things are changing.
For marriage that’s one thing. But what about other aspects. Would a person have difficulty being hired without a genealogical backstory? How?
They don't need a genealogical backstory because you need to understand that the population of Upper Castes in India is actually in the minority (approximately 28%). You can say that the Degree of Separation between you and someone else is probably at best 2 or 3. You can easily find out if the person is who he claims he is by just checking social media and seeing his relations etc. If you want to fake your caste, you will have to get your entire relations to change their caste names. It is not realistically feasible.
Like I said, the only solution to this is abolishing Caste System and bringing back the Varna System. Varnas were what it was originally. It was based on Vedic Scriptures. Caste System is a corruption of it and should be discarded. The sad part is that more than Upper Castes, the Caste system is highly prevalent in Lower Castes. We also have a Reservation System that guarantees a "Quota" for Lower Castes. So instead of abolishing we have ended up cementing the Caste System further. Please keep in mind that Reservation System is not the same as Affirmative Action in USA. It is completely different.
However, if a Company is hiring based on your surname, then you really need to question if the Company is the right fit for you. Forget whether it is moral or not. Such Companies won't sustain for very long.
If I am looking to hire, I want the best talent. I don't give two hoots to who you are, which Religion you profess, which Creed you belong to, which Caste you were born into or if you think i'll go to Hell. I care about bottom line. So I can go home richer than I was yesterday. Why would I want to deliberately sabotage it by focusing on surnames instead of talent? The Companies that do this won't survive for long.
But to answer your question directly: I know Companies that have this culture. They are wrong and will pay for it sooner than later.
The difference is that while we have the small majority genealogical nobility in Europe too, the more problematic one to me is the opposite where people are born into lower castes. That’s what I’m wondering if someone in India could somehow get rid of (if they are willing to e.g move and break with family). Not if they could fake their way into the small top minority.
Per 2019 statistics [1], 41% of Indians belong to OBC or Other Backward Class. Dalits are 20%. Scheduled Tribes are 9%. Forward/Upper Caste is 30%. So which caste should they navigate to per your opinion?
Also, is the person willing to give up all the benefits Constitution guarantees for lower castes? Especially give up Caste certificates that give scholarships, subsidies, affordable housing, Government jobs, Education quota etc? I don't think so.
> taking a new name
Even if you take a new name, Indians are by nature curious. We would like to know your background some way or the other.
That fact of the matter is that it cannot happen unless the Caste System is itself abolished and Varna System adopted. But this change has to happen through society and not through Law (because if you try to do it through Law, Lower Castes will be the first to revolt as it will affect their Reservation Opportunities which they don't want to lose). This change will happen when Indians read translations of our scriptures written by Indian Sanskrit Experts and not Western Indologists (who took assistance from conniving upper castes in the medieval times as well as having their own self-interests). This requires a social change that should percolate to the grassroots (especially rural areas).
Merely changing your name might only take you down the path for sometime. But sooner than later someone will discover your past somehow. It probably would have been possible 20-30 years ago when we had no internet and connectivity. Now everyone is on social media. You have a social graph available at your fingertips. There is no way to wipe off your past so to speak. This is probably possible with Personal Data Protection Bill that Indian Government might bring in sometime in the future. But until then, at least your digital footprint is left behind.
[1]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1001016/india-population...
This is not denying that politicians are exploiting the reservation system to gain votes and remain in power.
I am not blaming it just for sake of it. I am saying that Reservation in India is not the same as Affirmative Action in USA. There is no Quota System in USA. Current Reservation in India is actually reverse discrimination. Even B R Ambedkar wanted Reservation to only last for 10 years and not more because of its obvious discriminatory nature. It is totally against Article 14 of Indian Constitution that guarantees Equality. Instead of Reservation we need something like Affirmative Action that USA has. I am not saying discrimination was not done by upper castes. It was done. The solution to that cannot be reverse discrimination. That is revenge. It is not justice. Instead provide equal opportunity for all and lift those who were suppressed due to discrimination with scholarships, funding, free/affordable housing, free education and healthcare. We need upliftment not another form of discrimination all over again.
> All the Supreme Court Chief Justices have been Brahmins
That's patently false. We have had Sarv Mittra Sikri (an SC) as Supreme Court Chief Justice. Chief Justice S Rajendra Babu was OBC. Chief Justice R. M. Lodha who was OBC. All 3 are non-Brahmin Bahujan Chief Justices.
Apart from that we even have had Judges from minority Religion occupy Chief Justice position too.
Full list of non-Brahmin Chief Justices of India (18 out of 44 or roughly 40% of Chief Justices of India were non-Brahmin):
1. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harilal Jekisundas Kania
2. Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Hidayatullah
3. Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.C. Shah
4. Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.M. Sikri
5. Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Hameedullah Beg
6. Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.N. Singh
7. Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.M. Ahmadi
8. Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.S. Verma
9. Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.P. Bharucha
10. Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.N. Kirpal
11. Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Rajendra Babu
12. Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.C. Lahoti
13. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Y.K. Sabharwal
14. Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.H. Kapadia
15. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Altamas Kabir
16. Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. M. Lodha
17. Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur
18. Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.S. Khehar
> There are barely 4 Bahujan ministers in the cabinet
We have had plenty of Bahujan ministers holding major portfolios since 1947. Our President is Dalit and our Prime Minister is OBC. Two of the most important positions in our Republic. What more do you need?
I think a lot of the criticism of caste is based on silly assumptions but it will not help to defend if we make our own silly assumptions.
I do not say anything without scriptural backing.
> You are just repeating Arya Samajist fantasies
Are you an expert in this? I think not. Let me give you two videos of Padma Shri Bannanje Govindacharya who quotes directly from Vedic scriptures and Puranas to show that Varna System existed in the Vedic times (the videos have English Subtitles):
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrLtG-iM_e0
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jV3v7_y97x0
To give some background on Bannanje Govindacharya: He was an Indian philosopher and Sanskrit scholar versed in Veda Bhashya, Upanishad Bhashya, Mahabharata, Puranas and Ramayana. He wrote Bhashyas or commentaries on Veda Suktas, Upanishads, ShataRudriya, BrahmaSutra Bhashya, Gita Bhashya and was an orator. He was awarded the Padma Shri by the Government of India in 2009.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bannanje_Govindacharya
> rathakara as an example of a jati that does not belong to a varna
This was based on incorrect translations provided by Western Indologists like Albrecht Weber. It is time we stop using Western Indologists to interpret and translate our own scriptures. We have enough experts in India who know how to translate correctly.
Nope. Gotra is exogamous not endogamous. You can't marry within the same Gotra. That would become incestuous. You can only marry a person from another Gotra. Even Gotra combinations are created based on Vedic Astrology to ensure only the best match is possible.
> Where does 2500 years come from when genetics shows around 1200 BC
Vedic History is far older. Oldest surviving manuscript of Rig Veda dates to 1800 BCE [1]. Other Vedas dates to 1200-900 BCE. However the Vedas are themselves eternal having passed down through generations by word of mouth since start of Creation. Brahman/God transmitted this knowledge throughout the Creation which was heard by enlightened beings called the Rishis. They then transmitted that knowledge down to their disciples. That knowledge was only recently written down in manuscripts (those that survive are dated 1500 BCE-900 BCE). I say "recently" because the timelines are huge in Sanatan Dharma. But that is for another topic.
The Rishis mentioned in the Vedas are as old as the Creation itself through whom the respective lineage started. If Abrahamic Religions believe Adam and Eve to be the progenitors of human race, Dharmic Religions have Manu as progenitor (the word Manushya is derived from his name). The difference is that in Dharmic Religions the details of the Gotra is passed down through generations (starting from the Saptarishis: Agastya, Atri, Bhardvaja, Gautama, Jamadagni, Vashistha, Vishvamitra and Jambu) including information on who started the lineage. So we know which Gotra we belong to. That makes it easy to not enter into incestual relationships unknowingly.
[1] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/rig-veda-manuscrip...
Wait, what? From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigveda :
> The oldest surviving manuscripts have been discovered in Nepal and date to c. 1040 CE
Where did you suddenly get manuscripts ~2800 years older? When was this big news published?
Wikipedia is out of date here. It is quite possible some editor in Wikipedia forgot to update the date.
> Where did you suddenly get manuscripts ~2800 years older? When was this big news published?
I already provided the link in the explanation itself.
It was published in multiple news outlets. Here is another from Financial Express: https://www.financialexpress.com/archive/rig-veda-manuscript...
"UNESCOs Heritage Register list items of literary heritage with exceptional value identified by International Advisory Committee and endorsed by Director General of UNESCO.
This year it selected 38 such items, of which 30 are Rigveda scriptures kept in BORI.
The Institute gets grant from New Delhi-based government department for conserving manuscripts, National Manuscript Mission (NMM). It had arranged an exhibition in Germany recently. UNSECO persons visiting this exhibition, selected 30 manuscripts of Rigveda, Dhadphale said over telephone from Pune.
The manuscripts are dated from 1800-1500 BC and it is the first and perhaps oldest book in literature, Dhadphale said."
> 5. Oldest Dated Manuscript:
> No. 5/1882-83 (1464 AD)
> ...
> There are 30 manuscripts of Rigveda at the Institute, collected from different parts of India like Kashmir, Gujarat, the then Rajaputana, Central Provinces etc. They are written in Sharada, Devanagari and Devanagari with Prishthamatra and the material used for writing is birch bark as well as paper. The oldest of these manuscripts is dated 1464 A. D.
So if these are the texts you're referring to, then Wikipedia is not out of date here and your information is simply wrong. Not even the UNESCO nomination text attempts to claim that these manuscripts are three thousand years older than how old they actually are.
Why would you think the only alternative to a caste system be a 2500 years old one? This just seem like a false dichotomy.
We are talking about region, culture and tradition here which need to be preserved. If you are not an Indian you won't understand this. It doesn't apply to you.
That seems to be putting the horse before the cart.
Gothra being male reliant is pure patriarchy. The fact that a mother’s side bride getting married off to a groom from the joint family is common shows that it was a practice that has never had any regard to genetics.
This is pure whitewashing. You can admit the existence of embarrassing prejudices in the society including the Sati system which murdered wives when their husbands died. This does not necessarily take away from the other positives there might have been during the ancient times. Pretending problems aren’t real just makes them real.
I have scriptural backing for this. What do you have?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29754255
> The Gotras also include rarer ones like the Shatamarshana that go back to the Suryavamsha or the Solar dynasty
LMAO this is why half-baked knowledge of Sanatan Dharma is the worst thing ever. Suryavamsha itself means progeny of Surya. Who is Surya? Surya is the son of Kashyapa. One of the Rishis I mentioned already in the list above. I even mention in my first comment: "There are plenty more (who were descendents of these Rishis who also started their own lineage)."
There are close to 3000 such sub-Gotras. All of them trace back to these 7 Saptarishis and 1 other Rishi called Jambu. This makes it 7 primary and 1 secondary Gotra. All lineages post them are derived from these 8. Even Shatamarshana and other lineages (Suryavamshi/Chandravamshi etc) all converge to these 8 Gotras.
All the Devatas (Demigods/Dieties) are children of Kashyapa and Aditi. That is why the Devatas are also called "Adityas" because they are all born out of Aditi. Please don't throw around your half-baked knowledge of Sanatan Dharma and further corrupt the Religion. People like you, with horrible interpretations, are the reason we still have so many evil practices that exist in society today. Who just pretend to know everything and misguide the society but in reality have zero knowledge of our scriptures. I have studied it for 15 years now. Don't try to teach me what is in my own scriptures.
> Gothra being male reliant is pure patriarchy.
I already explained why it is so. This happens in Christianity, Judaism and Islam too. And so does in Sikhism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism etc. The wife lives with her husband. It is very rare to find husband living with wives family and mostly happens in few societies that are Matriarchal since a very long time.
> The fact that a mother’s side bride getting married off to a groom from the joint family is common shows that it was a practice that has never had any regard to genetics.
LMAO how? Mother's side bride is not of the same Gotra as joint family she is married into. There won't be any genetic issues.
> Pretending problems aren’t real just makes them real
No where did I pretend problems aren't real.
> You can admit the existence of embarrassing prejudices in the society including the Sati system which murdered wives when their husbands died
Where did I say I won't admit?
> This is pure whitewashing
LMAO. Okay. So explaining that the scriptures do not even mention these customs and we should discard them is whitewashing now? I am literally advocating for removing/abolishing these customs/traditions that are not true to Dharma. You are arguing that I should not. Do you want these evil customs to remain?
First read about the Varna System. Or at least watch the videos that I have linked ([1] and [2] — Discourse by Padma Shri Bannanje Govindacharya — was one of the greatest Sanskrit Vidwans of our times) to actually understand what the System was about. There was no hierarchy. The hierarchy came about in Jati/Caste System. Misinformation is worse than ignorance. Misinformation corrodes society. In the Varna System all the Varnas were equally important. Nothing was superior or inferior. All were Moksha adhikaris (or were eligible for Moksha). Even more so Shudras. Because everyone is born a Shudra. Doesn't matter what Varna he adopts later (this process is called Dvija or second birth — where he chooses to become Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya after the Upanayana Ceremony).
Do you know the meaning of Shudra in Sanskrit? It is a combination of two words: "Shuk" and "Dra". Shuk means "misery". Dra means "melt". So Shudra is one who melts for others miseries. Shudra is the basic quality that defines a human being (one who melts for others miseries). You cannot be a human being without first being a Shudra. No where in the Dharma Shastras is it written that you have to discriminate against a Shudra. Most of these discriminations stem from medieval practices of Jati/Caste System which go completely against Dharma and should be abolished.
To give you few examples: There is a Vedic story (Chandogaya Upanishad) of Satyakama who was raised by his mother Jabali. When he was just 5 years old, he goes to Rishi Haridrumata Gautama asking permission to study the Vedas. The Rishi asks him who is father is. Satyakama wouldn't know the answer and says he'll enquire from his mother about the name of his father as well as his father's Gotra. When he asks his mother Jabali, she says that she worked in multiple homes in her youth and doesn't really know who his father was (or in other words she worked as a prostitute). Satyakama goes back to Rishi Haridrumata Gautama and tells him whatever his mother told him. The Rishi, pleased with the boy's honesty, declares that he has qualities of a Brahmana as he demonstrated that he did not hide his reality. And because of which his quality is that of a Brahmana. So is the true seeker of Brahman/God. Rishi Haridrumata Gautama accepts him as his disciple and imparts Vedic knowledge.
To make it even more explicit: All the Vedas were compiled by Krishna Dvaipayana Vyasa (popularly known as Veda Vyasa). Veda Vyasa was born to a Shudra mother (who was co-incidentally a fisherwoman by name of Matsyagandha/Satyavati; saying so because your username says "IndianFisherman"). That itself should make it clear to you that we did not have Caste System but Varna System. There was no hierarchy. This hierarchy came into play only in modern times. If the Compiler of the Vedas was himself born to a Shudra mother where does the question of Shudras being inferior to Brahmins arise from?
We all bow to that great Vyasa who gave us the Vedas.
Also..all Hindu gods are non-Brahmins..Rama was Kshatriya and Lakshmana’s mother Sumitra was a Shudra. Krishna was from a family of land owning cowherds. Many southern dynasties had Shudra kings esp in the south. Vishwamitra was a Kshatriya who became a Brahmin and parasurama was a Brahmin who became a warrior/Kshatriya. Valmiki who also wrote Ramayana that is read as a holy text in india today was a Hunter and a butcher.
The word ‘caste’ is from the Portuguese word ‘casta’ and a later invention.
I like that all this is discussed openly these days. Maybe people can be educated from the original texts and scriptures. Time to fix the colonial and invaders’ mischiefs.
* for what it's worth, Hinduism has a lot of heterodox interpretations, and at least historically there is large number of variations of it. Modernity (incl' British administration) helped homogenize it partially. I think very loosely, it can be categorized as putting a label on the various collections of folk belief structures popular with the people of south asia formed from the admixture of vedic and pre-vedic practices syncretized together.
It's possible, it's called changing one's religion, its a politically charged topic in India currently.
Most Muslims and Christians, in India, forever have been caste refugees. And continue to be so.
Since this involves changing ones identity and culture in a very fundamental way, it has deep ramifications on demographics, politics and overall things in general.
Most backwards classes never had the wealth to sit on a plane, let alone study in the US. The pursuit of high positions in someone else's company is looked down upon in merchant communities. Additionally, the forward castes were among the only ones to know English well enough due to history in the British Civil service. (A similar thing happened to the parsis)
So, CEO of a tech company is the kind of position that rewards academic pursuit of knowledge, a secondary emphasis on money (for your early years at least), being brought up in privilege and a kind of society that views CEO as the highest status post.
The Brahmins satisfy this criteria perfectly.
Wait for a generation or two. The most privileged of India are actually staying home. The American dream is a middle class pursuit and the demographics of South Asians at tech companies are rapidly changing.
Sauce- a non-forward class Indian immigrant tech dude
______
One new type of discrimination that's going unnoticed is the 'IIT' bias. More and more, top universities use being an IITian as the badge of honor for upperclass Indians. This is visible among the students as well. They often form cliques rather quickly. BitS, IIIT and NIT folks may get honorary entry to these groups if they are 'cool' enough. But, if you went to a no-name school in India, you are always expected to prove yourself in a manner that IITians never are.
The removal of GREs for admissions is making this divide more concrete.
It is a shame, because the IIT-JEE is a very specific type of examination that requires sacrificing around 3-5+ years of your most formative years for a low probability chance at entering an elite institution (The true geniuses, a minority of the IIT student body are exceptions.).
I know a large number of incredibly talented students at mediocre universities with zero avenues for pursuing research or adding some solid achievements to their resume, because the rich keep getting richer, and all the opportunities flow into IITs and some of the other aforementioned colleges.
For others here, backward classes here is apparently a term for demographic groups that are given discriminatory preferences in Indian law, for example reserved quotas at universities or minimum promotion quotas for different groups. But I also read in articles that came up, that the majority of Brahmins live in poverty, and that various forms of reservation (discriminatory preferences) can actually set aside a super majority of seats in various institutions for other groups. That sounds like an incredibly biased system and anti-meritocratic. It also doesn’t sound to me like forward classes have wealth to ‘sit on a plane’ either.
- a few poor upper caste families does not diminish the wealth and privilege of the vast majority of that caste
- the majority of INDIANS live in poverty so obviously a lot of upper caste Indians do too
- living in poverty or not isn't the only advantage of being upper caste
Lower caste people can literally be murdered and the police won't even care. Poverty is one thing, but being untouchable in India can literally mean you are outside the law with the same rights as a rock on the ground. Not formally of course, but in practice. Watch this video for a sample of someone who had the luck to even get his story heard: https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedstatesofindia/comments/m6s3ey...
Majority of upper castes don't have the wealth to sit on plane. Few of them do.
Funny thing is often Brahmins (preistly caste) and warrior castes have less wealth and influence than merchant castes.
On balance, every math genius I knew cracked IIT top 1000 (necessary to get CS). But most people who I knew got in, were much more likely to be hard workers rather than geniuses. Not a symmetrical relationship.
The majority of IITians are insane hardworkers and give up a lot of personal development to get there.
On the other hand, what i find more visible is regionalism. It is common to stereotype say a Punjabi, a Bihari or Tamil or a Marathi. Both in front of behind each others’ back.
Maybe you are from the upper caste, people from lower caste will have a different opinion.
Just because you have not experienced it does not mean those talks dont happen.
Its usefulness, like most things, depends where you fall along it. I'm sure those at the top find it very useful to get the things they want.
The caste system will die as India urbanizes and good riddance to it. Apparently the economist thinks it's relevant because they have nothing else to talk about.
How did they discover this? My colleges thought it was a great idea to post the caste next to exam seat numbers. Yeah… this was in a metro, not a small town.
Here in the US, some narrow minded people straight up ask about caste. Some are “smarter” and ask about how you celebrate specific festivals as a way of inferring your caste.
It’s deeply systemic in India much like the systemic racism in the US. Only a privileged person can say it’s gone since no one treats anyone as untouchable anymore. There are many more subtle ways. People don’t get jobs because of their last names. Promotions will be denied or you might be the first to be laid off. Nepotism is rife.
My wife is upper caste and her life experience in India is diametrically opposite of mine. She acknowledges my experience but still doesn’t fully comprehend it. Heck my in law still cling to stereotypes and how I’m one of the good ones (cue similarity to racism in America)
If you really look carefully you’ll start to notice it everywhere.
https://www.npr.org/2020/08/04/898574852/its-more-than-racis...
My take away from this is that there is nothing natural about one caste having an advantage in business, that success in any field has much more to do with who has financial and social capital than with what caste someone is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Marriage_Act,_1954
Obviously, just like mixed race marriage took a while to be culturally accepted in the US, it is a similar situation in India.
More importantly, it almost always comes down to socioeconomic class rather than caste or race. The upper socioeconomic “castes” or “tribes” or whatever you want to call them have been inter marrying forever, and no one cares.
I would easily bet if a Brahmin kid brought home a significant other worth a billion dollars, their parents would not give a crap if the SO was a lower caste person. By definition, just being worth a billion dollars would somehow elevate them out of their caste. Same with white and black and Asian and Latin American or any other tribal designation.
But it makes a lot of sense that a family with centuries of experience in commerce is more likely produce leading businesses. It would be foolish not to factor that in to decision making as a signal.
This is a sloppy article, and I do find the article’s assertion tenuous. There is an ecosystem of educated Indian elite[1]. Perhaps Brahmin’s are overrepresented as a group in that, but I’m not so sure. There are certainly some underrepresented groups, but the caste system isn’t binary. It’d be interesting to see some unbiased data.
[1] Relatively speaking. While more privileged than a large majority of Indians, a lot of them come from modest middle-class backgrounds (by Indian standards, back in 70s, 80s pre-liberalization India), leveraged their privilege of education through sheer grit and work.
These things really do span generations.
EDIT: I really shouldn't say tribalism is not useful. We wouldn't be so tribal if it didn't have its benefits (evolutionarily speaking). But now that we live in a global world it is increasingly becoming a net negative.
Tribalism has brought us, wars, petty disputes, populist politicians and bigotry.
I know which one I would choose in a heartbeat.
I would say most people all over the world maintain a weak form of particularist identity and a weak notion of global identity and simply don't think about the contradictions.
Tribalism, by my definition at least, comes when the foreigner (whether ethnically or ideologically) is seen as not just an outsider but also as a competitor or a threat. In extreme situations perhaps they are, but in a civil society properly governed by the rule of law, this kind of tribalism is just poison for a community.
I’d go further and say that because it’s an evolved inclination, we’re far less immune to it than we’d like to think - that tribalism and globalization form a false dichotomy; you can have both. I.e. tribalism within a framework of international cooperation or a global empire as the will of a tribe (or alliance of a few tribes).
The post-war global order is a very new thing, depends on a delicate power balance enforced by continual threat of war - buy in or die is hardly what you probably want to endorse when you champion globalization, but there’s a degree of that at work since the end of WWII. Growing up a Roman citizen makes you kinda partial to the global benefits of empire. If you disagree with Rome, you realize it’s not all peaches and cream.
What’s different in the modern world we live in is more the scale of the tribes than a lack of tribes. But sitting in Rome, you think all the world is Rome.
Degrees matter here. Most of the world's population live in countries where less than 1% of the people are immigrants. That's not very global.
Western Europe and countries founded by colonists from Western Europe (the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) are following a different pattern than most of the world.
On one hand the Economist spreads tropes like "Brahmins have a tendency for bookishness". Replace Brahmin with Jew and it becomes anti-semitic but saying it for Brahmins is ok?
Should'nt the fact that the Brahmins who are poorer on average than the other two castes who "follow" them in the hierarchy disprove the notion of hierarchical caste system? If they really did dominate the hierarchy, could they not marshal capital given their abundant intellectual resources to dominate commerce in India? This reminds of the various Jewish world control conspiracies which are simply falsified by pointing to the horrific suffering that the Jews have suffered at the hands of said conspiracy theorists for over two thousand years. Similarly, the fact Brahmins that they do not dominate commerce or wealth generation prove that the so-called hierarchy does not exist?
Commerce in India, as the Economist points out but then glosses over, is dominated by guilds just like it did in most of the world including Europe, China and Japan. It is pretty easy to get into the Diamond business if you are from one of the few families who were traditionally in the Diamond business from the State of Gujarat or Rajasthan. Even better if you were from the village of Palanpur [1]. Why? It is easy to apprentice in the industry, get access to capital, know-how etc. etc. Ditto if you want to get into one of the traditional industries that have a long history of being dominated by guilds. This even holds true in the US today - it is easier to start a Motel if you are a Patel because you can find someone in the extended family who is in the business, whom you can tap into for advice, funding or partnership. Same for starting a Donut join in SoCal if you are SE Asian, Retail if you are Syrian Jewish, etc.
Brahmins have long been dominant in education because their traditional profession requires learning complex concepts and memorizing tens of thousands of pages. This was similar to how Ashkenazi Jews but not Sephardic Jews came to dominate the sciences and the Nobels [2]. I suspect that the selection pressures experienced by Brahmins are similar to those experienced by Ashkenazi Jews.
Not a Brahmin, FWIW and neither is Parag Agrawal who is the CEO of Twitter. Another fact that should dissuade people from the notion of Caste-dominated industries is that 3-4 of the top-20 industrial families in India, (Tata, Wadia, Godrej, Shapoorji Pallonji, etc.), are Zoroastrians who came to India from Persia 1500 years ago fleeing Islam and are still practicing Zoroastrians.
[1] https://www.rediff.com/business/special/how-palanpurs-diamon...
[2] https://web.mit.edu/fustflum/documents/papers/AshkenaziIQ.jb...
The point and problem is not any <community> specifically . All the communities exhibit clanish closed minded discriminatory mentality
You mention Farsi companies and as a group of people. Even into 21st century TATA went with family and Farsi first with Cyrus Mistry(6th generation!) before finally going to professional management. Every Farsi and other family lead companies in other communities are all like this. Very few indian companies are professionally managed.
It is just not in work either As a group farsi people are extremely closed and really like to only marry internally even Gujarati jains who perhaps are closest have hard time intermarrying.
Almost every community in India does this a lot and that is discriminatory and bad.
It should not matter what color my skin is, what my surname is, or who my great grandfather was.
You raise an interesting notion about the lack of intermarriage by Parsis, Jains and so on. I am glad that your analysis transcends the false lens of caste but still hangs onto the notion that individual communities, some of who, date back 1000s of years, have some obligation to erase their identity in pursuit of a (false) notion of Universalism. Why should Jains and Parsis have to intermarry and erase their identity? We don't force devout Christians and Muslims to erase their closely held beliefs and marry outside their religion? Why should communities like Jains and Parsis be asked to carry that cross? Do we ask Swedes/Japanese/Chinese/French to marry outside and then why do you hold up that standard for Indian communities?
It is another issue if minority shareholders are being disadvantaged because professional managers are not being chosen but transferring voting power to their own in the case of Tata/Cyrus Mistry is no different than Reliance/Ambani (or Wipro/Azimji) passing the baton of Chairmanship to their family.
while I only expanded to the example you cited but specifically mentioned it is a problem with every single community in India.
I couldn't possibly have made it clearer it has not do with only a single community small/big deserving or otherwise, but affects all. I can only assume you choose to ignore and read what only you wanted to.
The point was inherently companies[1] in India at all levels discriminate on whom to hire and promote. Even companies like Oracle in the U.S. have been sued /accused of this kind of discrimination made by senior indian staff.
It is not minority shareholders we are talking about, it is employees who don't get hired or worse never given the opportunity to raise up ladder despite having the merit to do so. It is just not employees either it includes suppliers, vendors, customers, policy makers, politicians , civil servants are all potentially treated and treat the same way.
[1] keeping racial identies and only intermarry and keep that cultural identify is every community prerogative to do so no one is complaining, calling them racists is mine and it does make each community and the country as a whole racist. That is not important for this discussion however.
What they do at work is what the article is about and this discussion is about and what matters to everyone's life.
In the south its also possible but more tricky as the surname tends to be the fathers’s name and not an ancestral name that gets carried down.
[0] - https://www.momjunction.com/articles/brahmin-caste-surnames-...
You can look at common conventions here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_name
Indians in America have often discarded that tradition. But I think about 2/3 of Indians in America are Brahmins, so you do pretty well by just assuming everyone is a Brahmin.
Now tilaka etc. Slightly more likely but bear in mind (I presume you are North Indian based on your spelling of janoi am I right?) in many places vegetarianism isn't an absolute norm even amongst Brahmans. Also I would presume purely as a matter of sociology vegetarianism would be one of the distinctive features least likely to go because it is something increasingly fashionable in the larger community whereas janoi etc. are not.
You should just discriminate based on something straightforward like car size or hat color
Also remember that its very easy here in India to preach something in public and do the opposite in private (not being cynical here). We are a tolerant society and especially tolerant of hypocrisy.
As you probably already know, vegetarian diet is not always black and white and can become complex with rules on days of the week, specific days on lunar calendar etc.
I believe there are shibboleths they use to suss each other out as well such as asking about ancestral village, charity customs, etc.
(speaking about actual Indians as well as 0-gen and 1-gen. Obviously if immigrants somewhere those tendencies disappear over time.
In other parts of India, vegetarian is kind of the norm, amongst all hindus, and many non-hindus as well.
See for example: https://www.worthview.com/vegetarians-vs-non-vegetarians-per...
Nehru specially got himself a christian chef, so he can cook him beef, and pork, without having to hear too much whispers behind his back.
Sometimes traditional attire/sari style and jewelry can indicate even the sub sect of Brahmins. Hair style(for weddings) and sari drape. We can tell from the design of the wedding chain/pendent(we don’t wear rings. Wedding chains are hidden behind clothes we wear and not publicly visible. In some families they add coral or gold beads for every child born for example.
Some Brahmin women stamp their arms with a religious symbol and only women who have that singed design can enter their kitchens. For example, I myself couldn’t enter some kitchens even though I am a Brahmin because I don’t have the symbol and hence don’t observe the same ritual purity as they do in their kitchens)
Every family has a unique design/stamp on their wedding jewelery..it’s rather broad but easy to join dots with other clues and very easy to map six degrees.
Accent even if we speak the same language, which festivals they observe and use of certain terms to describe food too.
But I can only tell for women/kitchen details. I don’t know about menfolk.
My aunt could tell where someone is from just by looking at the weave of their wedding sari …but that’s a generational thing, I guess..
Are you one of those Americans who think any expression of e.g. White/Southern pride is a sign of KKK racism? I mean it could be but some people just enjoy being Southern.
"Caste System" in India is like "Patriarchy" or "Structural Racism" in the West. Some people are very invested in the idea. Some think it is one of several factors. Some argue it is an invalid concept and some just say la la I'm not listening.
What I am pushing back against is the idea that there is one static monolithic hierarchical “caste system” that explains Indian society. Reality is more complex.
70% Indians are from the lower caste.
How then do you define “lower”? Ritual status? Socioeconomic influence? Material wealth? Feeling lower? In each case some of that 70% would qualify and some would not. Some of the 30% would qualify and some would not.
KKK members used to wear a mask in public after all.
While it is much harder for you to see the signs as you won't have the cultural context for this, for another indian it would be easy to identify such behaviour.
The remembered village my M. N. Srinivas and anything on caste system written by Prof. Andre Beteille (He is Indian born to French father and a Bengali Brahmin women. "Sunshine on the garden" is his lovely autobiography.).
In general, Economist has been paywalled for 10 years now.
Sometimes, I'm not sure myself who is more caste obsessed out there these days, Indians, or the India obsessed Western people.
How to call it? Inverse casteism?
What? Is it a thing in Canada? I am sure almost nobody in Europe ever heard of castes you mentioned
Maybe the asses you overheard work with a lot of Indians and were trying to make some kind of diversity quota within their workforce originating from India, but castes are not something the western world knows about, let alone cares about. If people know about it, they probably know about it as "some kind of class system they do in India" like they were told in school once.
The complexities and ancient history of the caste system simply don't exist in the same way in modern western society. Europe was once ruled by nobility in a system not dissimilar of the caste system, but compared to the ancient history of the Indian subcontinent even those bloodlines seem like a temporary thing.
I'd say the modern west has a much more overt system of racism based on skin colour, accents, facial features and looks alone, rather than the long lines of family history and customs that castes seem to revolve around. A dumber, simpler, more primitive and arbitrary system of classism (or even racism) if you will. I'm not sure if a sophisticated class system is better or worse than a crude one, but they're different enough to make them difficult to compare.
None of these leaders became who they are because of their caste, but only merit
It's a nonsense article designed that is designed to instigate gutter level politics.
Some of us were given a massive leg up. Others were born into families that have been systematically suppressed and intentionally prevented from making progress for generations.
I would rather focus on helping those who haven't made progress because they were systematically suppressed and be given a massive leg up. That shouldn't come at the cost of those who genuinely put their own efforts to climb the ladder in their respective fields.
We have enough jobs and money to afford both. To help those who are systematically suppressed as well as continue to hire those who are born into privilege. Definitely not at expense of each other only because we want to check off some morality list. Both are human beings at the end of the day. I would want to see both prosper.
No, no, and no. I'm not proposing that we should tear anyone down, nor that we should stop hiring qualified people on the grounds that they were privileged. I agree with you 100% that that would be unfair and counterproductive. What I'm arguing for is not a policy change, it's a paradigm shift.
I believe that the first step to effecting real change in generational cycles of poverty is to acknowledge that generational cycles exist at all. Wealth does not simply flow to those who have merit--merit is in most (but not all) cases a product of wealth. It's a feedback loop.
We cannot place full credit for success on the shoulders of the privileged without also placing full blame for failure on the shoulders of the downtrodden. To acknowledge and fix the generational cycles that keep people down, we have to first acknowledge and study the generational cycles that prop people up.
I agree with your sentiment. However, what typically happens is, when we do acknowledge the generational cycles, we have a reactionary attitude towards the issues of the past. The downtrodden feel "betrayed" while the privileged feel "guilt". At this point, you need to be able to resolve the issue in a manner in which both are not left feeling discriminated again.
However, the situation is different in India. Reservation system is not the same as Affirmative Action in US. Rather, Reservation System is now practicing reverse discrimination[1] with official stamp from Government of India.
[1]: https://thelogicalindian.com/story-feed/awareness/affirmativ...
So what ended up happening is that instead of giving a leg up to the downtrodden, we reversed discrimination and now discriminate on upper castes through reservation quotas while also giving a leg up to the downtrodden.
Most upper castes don't complain and instead just migrate abroad for greener pastures and typically occupy high positions in Western companies. Which is also one of the reasons why Western firms have more Upper Castes as opposed to Lower Castes. Lower Castes prefer Government jobs. Government jobs have a lot of social value in India as it comes with promise of security and prestige. Especially if you get into Administrative Services.
I'll treat people as individuals regardless of what class, gender, race, sexuality, or any other qualifier, as long as they have the cognitive capability to comprehend reality and be well informed.
Not the OP, but you're moving the goalposts a bit here.
The OP stated they ignore people who talk about 'caste', not 'casteism'. That's like saying they ignore people who talk about race, not like saying they ignore people who talk about racism.
Not that you can entirely divorce discussion of one from the other, but the intent is a bit different.