politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is such a poor understanding / oversimplification of Indian culture and history.
First it's important to point out that much of America was an apartheid state predicated on a race based caste system for most of its history. You know which race was high caste and which was low. If not, ask your grandparents (or parents for that matter).
Can anyone today look at those of the race that was high caste and assume that they continue to look down on the historically low caste? No, it's not that simple.
Usha came from a family of scholars who were well regarded as philanthropists and educators in their village.
Assuming you know anything about how she thinks of others based on her caste is actually incredibly regressive. Its equivalent to assuming every white person must is a racist.
I think she made a terrible choice in JD. But let's not assume to know the woman based on archaic presumptions. We can do better than that.
I went to school for Anthropology. I know not to make assumptions about cultures. I'm not making an assumption about members of caste systems today, but what it was like and what some continues to be like. And there is absolutely no way she isn't racist or hates the low class if she can still stand by her husband. It's not like it was an arranged marriage. She picked him, she can leave him.
It's like looking at a white guy who's racist and saying, yep, it's because he comes from a long line of racists. It's as simple as that.
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.
We're just gonna have to agree to disagree.