Hacker News Reader

Comment by jagdish123 | Hacker News Reader

As an Indian, coming from a lower caste family, this makes me happy. India already banned caste discrimination years ago and it had a positive impact on marginalized communities. The next step might be to follow something akin to caste-reservations that we have in India, to level the playing field for communities that have been marginalized for centuries. Advocating for more lower-caste Indian representation in private companies can be a good start. It can be a part of DEI initiatives that we have seen so many companies embrace.

Overall, this is a positive development. But we still have a long way to go!

View on HN

So if you are decsriminated against in another country you should get advantages here in the US? That seems wrong.

I think the point is that the people in US companies who are caste sensitive -- often after growing up in an Indian household-- are using their positions of power to hurt some castes. Remember that many of the big (and small) tech companies in the US are run by the Desi.

Caste discrimination in American tech etc. is very precedented, hence the laws here. I.e. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23697083

There was only one case brought by Equality Labs, the Cisco case, which was thrown out. Any perceived discrimination also will be made out to be caste discrimination as there is money to be made, benefits to be had.

Upper caste manager dings lower caste employee for performance --> caste discrimination

Upper caste employee talks back to lower caste manager ---> caste discrimination

This is how things will play out.

That caste reservation system you mentioned is fundementally flawed. For example, it will favor children of low caste individual who already benefitted from the system and is at economically very priviledged position over children of a high caste individual who are economically disadvantaged.

> That caste reservation system you mentioned is fundementally flawed.

The caste reservation system has been pivotal in bringing social issues faced by the lower castes to mainstream politics. Only when some lower caste members made it up the social ladder through reservations, were they able to articulate their issues and lend a helping hand to others in their social groups.

> For example, it will favor children of low caste individual who already benefitted from the system and is at economically very priviledged position over children of a high caste individual who are economically disadvantaged.

Economics does play a certain part in social dynamics. But social advantages trump any economic disadvantages. Even though a lower-caste member might be in an economically advantageous situation, they are still subject to the social dynamics, put in place by the upper echelons of the hierarchy, that are antagonistic to their upliftment. This justifies caste-reservation so that we, as a humanitarian society, can lift up everybody.

In America, should the caste reservation system give more good jobs to lower-caste Indians at the expense of higher-caste Indians, or at the expense of all other demographics, or at the expense of white people?

> at the expense of higher-caste Indians, or at the expense of all other demographics, or at the expense of white people?

I am assuming you mean: demonstrably meritorious members of socially priviledged groups. Well, what gets lost in the discussion of merit is how an individual achieves it and how social factors that are outside their hand influence them in reaching or never-reaching their true potential. Reservations, in my opinion, should be seen as lending a hand to individuals who find themselves subject to antagonistic social structures that are a product of divisive and elitist thinking spanning hundreds of years. It is not a tussle, so as to say, between one group versus another, but a collaboration between the two halves of society (one which enjoyed a higher position in the social hierarchy for centuries and the other which was exploited) to realize the best in all of us. This might understandably entail priviledged members of society letting go of some of their priviledges they enjoy due to their birth in a certain family.

But you still end up with the problem where your caste determines your privilege; the only difference is which caste benefits. Wouldn't it be better to work toward a system where the caste has no impact on your opportunities?

The idea of Indian workers in tech getting more representation sounds a little silly. I don't know the breakdown of percentages per caste, but it would be interesting to see if they are still each massively over-represented vs. other groups. The only way it would make any sense would be at the expense of other castes (which I also don't really agree with either, since in a way it is just reinforcing the caste system by relying on it as a criterion/metric), while also reducing Indian representation as a whole

Yep, its all about opportunities and nothing else. All identity politics is based on getting benefits for one's own group.

>> Overall, this is a positive development. But we still have a long way to go!

The way is eternally long, once reservations are introduced, who would want to remove them.

In India, now it is a competition among castes to show that they are the most backward, since they would be considered for reservations then.

GOD NO, I have seen this in India where someone from a so-called low caste only has to get 50% in exams to become a doctor whilst other castes have to get 70% or higher. It creates a system where merit goes and instead you get stupid people into high roles.

Anyone should get a role if they get the right scores, not because of their surname

Reply on news.ycombinator.com