politics

I think one can reasonably argue a greater social pervasiveness of the Indian caste system, especially when it comes to kinship and marriage. It's dying out in urban parts of India but boomers and the older generation, especially in rural areas, certainly still care about marriages remaining within caste.

Many of the boomers I have engaged with in the US are relatively open to their child or grandchild having an interracial relationship but there are still a lot who would be torn apart by it (on the basis of white people being a higher caste).

Institutionally, both countries have gone down different routes to address historical injustice. In India, at independence, a caste reservation system was created to make sure those of historically lower castes had equal access to oppurtunity. This is how DEI is perceived by some in the US, as a reservation system for people of historically disenfranchised groups, though it certainly isn't explicitly meant to work like that.

Some in India feel that the reservation system has been an overcorrection in some aspects but the debate is ongoing as is the debate around DEI in the US.

There is an excellent Indian film produced by Karan Johar (with Martin Scorcese as an executive producer) based on the book A Friendship, a Pandemic and a Death Beside the Highway by Basharat Peer which tells the story of a Muslim (Shoaib) and person born into a lower caste (Chandan).

I'll spoil the film since it's relevant to the conversation. Both aspire to join the police force which would break each of their family's intergenerational cycle of poverty. Both face significant hurdles in the form of Islamophobia and caste discrimination. Ultimately Chandan gets in and Shoaib does not. This creates resentment between them. Chandan's acceptance gets questioned by society at every turn, under the assumption that he got in due to his caste rather than merit.

It's a tragic story (based on true events) but Chandan's acceptance is delayed and Shoaib and Chandan end up working at the same labor mill where their friendship is rekindled. The beginning of the COVID pandemic brings an end to their labor contract. Unfortunately Chandan comes down with COVID on their way home (which goes through the middle of nowhere). They get kicked off the transport vehicle that was taking them home for the safety of other passengers and try to trek it with Chandan ultimately dying on the side of the road.

At the end of the movie it's revealed that Chandan went out of his way to make sure his caste was not mentioned anywhere on his application and he even went as far as to use a different surname to make sure his application didn't get special consideration (through the caste reservation system).

It's an interesting analysis on identity, oppurtunity and how hierarchy within society is very very hard to subvert.

Ive worked in several different American cities. I think a lot of progress has been made and I'm glad to see it. But there is still a lot of work to do. In nearly every city I've lived in, there is a section where white people live and another where black and Latino people live. In the companies and insitutions I've worked in, black and Latino folk are almost always over-represented in entry level positions and white folks are heavily represented in upper management and the C suite. It absolutely reminds me of the caste system in India. Though I acknowledge there are key differences.

Some of the rhetoric I hear in the US also mirrors the rhetoric among the privileged class in India around race/caste. Particularly (in the US) the questioning of merit targeted at African Americans or immigrants on, for example, an H1b visa. There are a lot more similarities in a situation where neither country should want to be like the other.

There is also a body of literature from American Caste and Class (Warner 1936) to Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents (Wilkerson 2020) outlining how and concluding that, in America, race is caste.

I'll end with a quote from a revered civil rights figure in the US, who was heavily inspired by Gandhi, and travelled to India to visit his home for inspiration. While doing a speech in Kerala, India he was introduced as a "fellow untouchable" (low caste) from America. He was initially aghast at the portrayal but after a moment of reflection he famously said "Yes, I am an untouchable, and every Negro in the United States of America is an untouchable" (MLK Jr.)

If only going to school in anthropology meant you were knowledgeable in every culture.

You clearly made an assumption about her worldview based on her caste. It's no different than you looking at another person and assuming how they think based on their race.

If you want to judge her based on her words and actions I welcome that. If you're going to make assumptions based on immutable characteristics then you are engaging in bigotry, anthropology degree or not.

My personal standard is to not tolerate "these people are like this because they were born that way" no matter where it comes from. You shouldn't tolerate it either.

I'm more than happy to inform you on India's varna/jati system, how it became codified due to colonial administration, what has been done to mitigate its institutionalization and how it persists today since your anthropology degree clearly fell short of that.

East Asian or Chinese, Japanese etc. Or oriental if they are racist.

It gets confusing because usually people just call them asian too 💀 i say "east asian" though because everyone knows you mean chinese, korean et cetera in that case, and you might specify south asian for indians, pakistanis etc.

In the UK we have more south asians than east asians, but I'm pretty sure it's the inverse in america. So if somekne in the uk says describes someine as "asian," it's a safer bet that they mean "indian subcontinent" or middle east rather than East-Asian.