California is taking on caste-based discrimination

ps: I am actually one of the middle caste hindu & my wife is upper caste. Inter caste marriages are not as uncommon as you think or what british media likes to portray, especially after the internet based 'discovery' came into scene.

> Often called the sistema de castas or the sociedad de castas, there was, in fact, no fixed system of classification for individuals, as careful archival research has shown. There was considerable fluidity in society, with the same individuals being identified by different categories simultaneously or over time. Individuals self-identified by particular terms, often to shift their status from one category to another to their advantage. For example, both mestizos and Spaniards were exempt from tribute obligations, but were both equally subject to the Inquisition. Indios, on the other hand, paid tribute yet were exempt from the Inquisition. In certain cases, a mestizo might try to "pass" as an indio to escape the Inquisition. An indio might try to pass as a Mestizo to escape tribute obligations.[18]

> Casta paintings produced largely in 18th-century Mexico have influenced modern understandings of race in Spanish America, a concept which began infiltrating Bourbon Spain from France and Northern Europe during this time. They purport to show a fixed "system" of racial hierarchy which has been disputed by modern academia. These paintings should be evaluated as the production by elites in New Spain for an elite viewership in both Spanish territories and abroad portrayals of mixtures of Spaniards with other ethnicities, some of which have been interpreted as being pejorative in nature or seeking social outrage. They are thus useful for understanding elites and their attitudes toward non-elites, and quite valuable as illustrations of aspects of material culture in the late colonial era.

Not saying it’s impossible as I’m not familiar with the Latino community. And skin color discrimination appears not just in Latino communities. But caste systems pop up everywhere (e.g. America institutionalized it quite well into the socioeconomic structure).

I'm not a fan of the term either, but this is a wildly inaccurate generalization.

This is already illegal in any decent country. It's certainly illegal in at least the US, Canada, UK, and Germany. Assuming the person can actually communicate well enough for the job, discriminating on the basis of their accent or how they talk amounts to discrimination on the basis of racial, ethnic, or national origin.

It's often one of the textbook examples of what not to do.

> sometime just not having the same “local culture” is enough to be subject to that [...] other type of discrimination is political one

People can, and do, choose their politics. And a person's political opinions can say a great deal about their character. If someone believes some particularly evil or regressive thing, I don't want to employ them or work with them. Yes, it's discriminatory. But not all discrimination is necessarily wrong.

With a lot more caveats (since "poor cultural fit" is often code for "not the right race") the same thing can even apply to culture. I'd like to think I'm pretty open-minded, but if you employed someone from a completely different culture, with no previous experience in the culture of their new workplace, and no willingness to try to learn and adopt to local norms, it's just going to be an ongoing mess of confusion and misunderstanding for everyone involved.

Yes, that is also bad, but right now we’re discussing X. Solving X doesn’t mean your issue isn’t important, it just means we’re not discussing it right now. Now please stop trying to change the topic.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_discrimination_la...

See also

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regents_of_the_University_of...

you could tell by their last names if they came from same geographical region as you grew up in (or quite familiar with).

> If you saw someone walking 50 meters away, would you ...

most likely not.

The same is often claimed by children, obviously mostly when not yet true. The reality of the matter is determined by observable outcomes, not by self-declarations.

If, as in this case, the objective outcome is not indicative of successfull self-determination, a nanny is in order.

We should name and shame if a company doesn't act against discriminatory dog whistles.

I drink, eat meat, eat beef and do not bear any caste specific signifiers on my person. No other Indian expat has tried to enquire about my caste or treated me differently because it's ambiguous.

99% of Indian immigrants are Upper or Middle castes. The reason for this has not been studied. But a few causal factors can be.

- Wealth

India is a poor country. Most Indians upper or Lower caste are poor by first world standards. But the few Indians who are rich tend to be more upper caste (Scholarly, Mercantile or Landowning castes).

But this is also a bad explanation since most Indians who come to US for higher studies do so on a loan.

- Culture

Upper caste families even when dirt poor may have a higher emphasis on education which means they are overrepresented in employment based skilled immigration.

Edit: Vegetarianism often gets bandied around as an upper caste but most Urban Indians eat meat regardless of caste. So, except for a few cases caste is very much ambiguous since a caste that's upper caste in Western UP may be lower caste in Eastern UP.