Vijaya & Biswas vs Indra Nooyi

Indians who have managed to escape India and to settle in the West like flaunting their higher status- which affects their, or their children's, marriage prospects and life chances- so as to humiliate and exert hegemony over Indians still stuck in India. This trait passes over to the Second Generation, but only if they are employed in Higher Education teaching worthless shite- in which case they are looked down on by both Westerners and dark skinned immigrants to the West who are making way more money or simply aren't as stupid and ignorant. 

One reason for this is that darkies from shithole countries gain 'intellectual affirmative action' in the Western Academy.  They are then employed to award homeopathic doses of Paideia, but attested to by inflated Credentials, to cretinous victims of epistemic self-abuse. Suppose you don't fall into this capacious category. You can't complain that your Professor is shit and can't speak proper English because that makes you a Racist. Anyway, you are a cretin, otherwise you would not be studying shite under a shite Professor in a shite University.

India should be proud that it exports shite Professors of shite subjects. Expelling shit is a good thing- though only assholes do it. India should be ashamed it did not export all its shite Professors. One result is that it must continue to shit out shite Professors upon crap Departments of Western Universities.

As a case in point, consider the following article in Scroll.in, by Ramya Vijaya, a Professor of Economics at Stockton University & Bidisha Biswas, a Professor of Political Science at Western Washington University.

In her new book, Caste, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Isabel Wilkerson looks towards the Indian caste system to understand the stubborn persistence of racism in the US.

Wilkerson is being silly. America had a one drop rule. Thus it does not have the Mexican or other Latin American or Portuguese type caste system. Moreover, America does not have arranged marriage and an endogamous 'jati/biradari' solution to the 'stable marriage problem'. However, in India, Creed trumps Caste when it comes to endogamy. Indeed, Religion is powerful enough to redraw territorial boundaries. Caste is relatively innocuous.

Ackerloff, in his Nobel acceptance speech, said his study of Indian caste gave him the idea for 'efficiency wages'. An economist should have an economic theory of caste.  Vijaya has a shite theory of caste. This is because she is not an economist. She is a cretin regurgitating cretinous availability cascades for cretinous students. 

In a similar vein Indians, particularly in the diaspora, can look towards the recent soul searching over white racial privilege in the US in the wake the Black Lives Matter protests, to reflect on how caste-based segregation endures.

Very true! Patel policemen routinely gun down Sharmas on the streets. Vijaya herself insisted on being mentioned before Biswas because she is of higher caste not because Economists are superior to Political Scientists.  

The recent caste discrimination lawsuit launched against Cisco by the State of California has generated defensiveness among some in the Indian immigrant community with declarations of caste being a thing of the past and no longer a relevant influence on diasporic life.

Whereas the truth is that Patels on the police-force shoot Sharmas any chance they get.  

In our book Seeing White: An Introduction to White Privilege, we

we? Only Vijaya was co-author- along with two white ladies who whimpered in awe at their sublime privilege in getting to write a book with a honest to goodness darkie- that too one with an unpronounceable name. They give the following example of their thesis-

The problem with this story is that an African American woman might have said the same thing as the White lady. Melanin, or its lack, is irrelevant. The authors are deluded in their belief that the color of one's skin conditions expectations. Rather it is one's epistemic exposure or 'background beliefs' which are relevant. But these are shared by all with a similar upbringing and education. Americans are likely to have American values and beliefs no matter whether they are tall or short or fair skinned or dark skinned. 

 Furthermore, the fact is, plenty of Indians- myself included- have pickle with everything. When travelling, Hindu and Jain men, because of religious prohibitions of different types of food, carried pickle jars. This relish was used with all their meals. At home, the use of pickle is more sparing because of the greater variety of dishes. Thus the Indian American woman in this story might have made the same comment if she were married to an Indian man who had spent a lot of time travelling or living away from home in a region with few of his caste-fellows.

Incidentally, cucumbers are native to India and were pickled thousands of years ago. The type of lime pickle we now think of as normal in India is actually a recent innovation which occurred after the Portuguese introduced the American green and red chili. 

Things we take for granted may or may not be visible to us. Gender is something visible. Yet we take it for granted. Whiteness in America is visible as is Blackness and Gender. To some extent the same may be said for Sexuality. 

explored the seeming invisibility of whiteness; white Americans are not conscious of being white,

In the example quoted above, the 'white' lady was not actually being 'white'. She was being 'American'. An African American woman might have said the same thing. 

they perceive themselves and their experiences as the good, normal way of being.

Clearly these guys have never heard the expression 'Free, White, and Twenty One'. Nor have they heard of 'hyphenated-Americans' or 'White Trash' or 'Boston Brahmins'. They don't get that social stratification exists in every country. One reason people go to University is so as to alter the way they see themselves, they see the world, and the world sees them. 

Americans are conscious of where they fit into the social and racial hierarchy. Why? They are human beings. But some animal species too have an awareness of a 'pecking order'. The thing is not 'invisible' at all. Economists know that it is statistically testable. Political Scientists are aware that race, class, gender, education, age, etc. play a part in self-perceived identity. 

Religion plays a big part in the life of many Americans. They consider the 'good and normal' life to be the one held up as normative by their Religious Sect. That is why some homosexuals, instead of thinking of themselves as 'good and normal', pay money for 'conversion therapy'. 

Why are these two cretins arguing otherwise? Is it because they are cognitive coolies, epistemic untouchables, who escaped from a shithole country? Or is it because they are just as shit as other shite academics in shit University Departments?  

At the same time, they are hyper aware of other races and the ways in which people are not “white”.

The problem here is that Whites may beat up a White homosexual while idolizing a virile, heterosexual, African American sports star. 

Identity in an advanced Capitalist country is a complicated matter because the economic consequences of Identity are complicated. A white woman who 'passed' as a Professor of African American Studies may face worse consequences than an elderly 'one drop' Black Professor of Classics who, as in Phillip Roth's novel, is accused of being a Racist for using the word 'spooks'.  

In much the same way, upper caste experiences in the Indian diaspora are often thought of as the normal or good Indian immigrant success story.

Whereas ending up giving blowjobs at truck stops in between spells of incarceration is often thought of as abnormal and bad- more particularly if your name is Amartya Sen and you have tenure at Harvard. 

Why are people employed to empty bed-pans not considered to be role models whereas cardiac surgeons are celebrated? The answer is that surgeons get paid a lot of money.  They have to invest heavily in education. They must remain relatively sober or risk a ruinous malpractice suit. 

In a 2019 New York Times profile, Indira Nooyi the former chief executive of PepsiCo, a first- generation Indian immigrant often heralded for being one of the few high-profile female CEOs in the US, volunteered her caste identity. Her family, she mentioned “was a good, conservative Brahmin family, deeply steeped in learning and education. That was the only focus. The expectation was you would get, at a minimum, a master’s degree.”

Brahmin and Pariah are two words which have entered the English language. Brahmin has the connotation of being learned, sober, and high class. Nooyi, quite correctly, adverts to her family's high standing in these respects. She is saying, 'I am successful because my family was God fearing, Sober, Industrious and had a great veneration for Higher Education'. Another woman might have said 'my success is due to my Quaker background', or else 'my ancestors were Rabbis', or 'my parents attended Howard, like their parents before them'. It is right and proper to pay condign tribute to one's family if that is what helped you to rise. Nooyi, who went to my old school in T.Nagar, knows that Tamil Nadu has risen up because people of all castes and creeds have engaged in 'Tardean mimetics'. They have imitated those who invested in education for their kids. Sir Theagaraya Chetty, after whom T.Nagar is named, made it clear that non-Brahmins wanted to come up the same way as Brahmins. They had no hatred of them. This was further clarified by the A.D.M.K which ended up being led by a female Brahmin who was Chief Minister till she died recently. 

In openly proclaiming her upper caste identity,

She told the truth. But nobody in their right mind would think she got ahead in America because Americans reverence Tamil Brahmins. In other words, she- like her sister, Grammy nominee, Chandrika Tandon,- rose by merit. But that merit had a hereditary component. 

These two shitheads have no merit. They tell lies. 

she portrayed Brahminism in the same romanticised manner that some white Americans reminisce about the genteel, elegant and old-world charm of southern plantation life.

This is a stupid lie. Americans have a concept of 'Boston Brahmins', but Bostonians didn't own slaves. They were more likely to be Abolitionists. 

Suppose Indra Nooyi had risen because of her beauty and her charm. As a young debutante she married the heir to the Pepsi Cola fortune. Then her husband died and the CEO was incompetent and J.R Ewing tried to takeover Pepsi using underhand means. Indra is forced to take a seat upon the board. Using her feminine charms she wins over the head of the SEC who blocks Ewing's bid. Then Indra meets the Soviet leader at the White House. He becomes infatuated with her. She gets the sole right to sell Cola all over the vast territories of the Soviet Union. Then some Islamic terrorists kidnap her but she sings Dixie and tears come to their eyes and they find Christ and they release her.

Suppose all this was the case, then these two cretins would not be stupid, cretinous, liars.  

But the gentility of an old southern plantation lifestyle of course rested on the horrific extraction of wealth and profits from the slave labour of African Americans.

And the gentility of these two shitheads rests, of course, on the genocide and slavery which permitted the Universities where they teach to get the money to function. 

Now these worthless gobshites are pretending to be 'woke' and are hoping to jump on a bandwagon that is the exclusive property of African Americans and the First Nations. 

Nostalgia for the elegance of plantation owners not only represents an erasure of the brutality of slavery but also perpetuates a myth of refinement of white in contrast to the supposed lack of refinement of the non-white who were denied access to the means of refinement.

These cunts are using the fact that they managed to escape India to rub the noses of those still stuck in that shithole in the type of shite Scroll publishes for the foredoomed project of their upliftment to a level of equal stupidity.  

In the same way, the proclivity towards education is reflective of the Brahmin privilege of access to education,

But Tamil Brahmins had restricted access to higher education, especially in Medicine, which is why they turned to the private sector and emigrated in great numbers.  

a basic right that was explicitly forbidden to those belonging to the Dalit strata for several centuries.

But most Brahmins were illiterate! By contrast, some hereditary 'writer' and 'Doctor' castes were ritually low caste- or even Dalit- though they tended to rise in public esteem. Anyway, the education available at that time was as shite as the education these gobshite purvey.  

As a result, Brahmin households like Nooyi’s

of Sir Chetty's or, indeed, Dalit icons like M.C Raja's

often have access to long legacies of educated family members and extended networks that Dalit households with their much more recent access to education have never had the opportunity to build.

Some have. Most haven't. Tardean mimetics within endogamous sub-caste can cause rapid changes. The fact that the traditional occupation of Tamil Brahmins would not save them from starvation caused Tardean mimetics to operate in a counter-intuitive way. They embraced a Western Education which essentially said that everything they believed was shit. So they shifted the goal posts to the abstract fields of Mathematical Physics and Game theoretic Biology.  

In perpetuating the myth of a good Brahmin tradition of education,

So these two shitheads agree that there was no 'Brahmin tradition of education'. Them guys were ignorant and stupid. To pretend otherwise is to perpetuate a myth.  

Nooyi follows the same pattern of erasure and myth making of cultural superiority as southern whiteness.

No. She told the truth. These two cunts are telling stupid lies. But then they are useless wankers teaching worthless subjects. Nooyi did a proper job and she did it well. That is why we are interested in her but not interested in the crap these two cunts are flinging in our face.  

The Cisco case rests on this very same reflexive elevation of Brahmin access to educational networks.

But what about another case, also certified by the California Dept. on Employment and Housing discrimination, in which a 'Kappu Naidu' alleged that a 'Kamma Naidu' had harassed him on the basis of Caste? 

The Cisco case rests on the assertion that Dalits are darker in color and belong to a different race. But there are differences of color within sub-castes. A Reddy can sue another Reddy. In the UK a Pakistani Muslim Arain sued another Arain whom he alleged was a higher caste 'Chowdhury'. These two gobshites can be sued by any of their sub-continental students on the grounds of caste discrimination even if both belong to the lowest caste. Why? US law does not distinguish between which Race or Gender is supposed to be superior. A wealthy white man being boycotted by African American female janitorial staff can sue the Company and get big damages. Meanwhile very poor people working under horrible conditions get no help. Why? The Employer has deep pockets. The Government has shite lawyers. 

An Indian origin Dalit Cisco engineer complained about being denied professional opportunities by his Brahmin managers who became aware of his Dalit status.

Became aware? They knew each other from College.  

The managers’ bias, it seems, stemmed from the engineer’s admission to a prestigious engineering college in India on the basis of caste-based affirmative action rather than the caste-based Brahmin privilege of access to education.

This is the allegation of the complainant who certainly does have a private remedy against the Employer. The question is whether racial discrimination occurred. If the Court finds it has occurred, then any person from the sub-continent can sue his Employer any time he likes. Why? It would be easy to show that he is the only person who belongs to a particular sub-caste who is employed in that organization. Suppose I am one of 5 Vivek Iyers employed by Cisco. I am sacked for being drunk and not knowing shit about Computers. I sue. The other Iyers belong to different sub-sub-castes. I alone belong to the Viskey Venum Vadadesi Vadama subcaste.  

Nooyi or the Cisco managers are not alone; Indians in the diaspora often exhibit casual and unthinking pride in the ritualistic traditions of their upper castes families like thread ceremonies and certain dress codes, without a corresponding recognition of the exclusion and oppression it represents.

It is right and proper to take pride in one's own culture, family and religious traditions. Would these cunts dare to point a finger at Muslims for exhibiting 'casual and unthinking pride' in their traditions? How about orthodox Jews? What about Evangelical Christians- many of whom are African American? Is it not a fact that sober and religious people exclude drunken bums from entering their places of worship so as to provide blow-jobs in return for the price of a sandwich? Is it not oppressive to get the police to arrest nutters who turn up in the Church or the Mosque or the Synagogue to shout 'Hail Satan!'?

A growing recognition of the ongoing harm of such selective nostalgia has prompted a re-evaluation of the popular plantation wedding industry in the US that used to promote southern slave plantation houses as romantic sites for wedding celebrations in the genteel southern tradition.

There has also been a growing recognition that if you get a shit degree, taught by worthless gobshites, from shit Universities, then you are going to have a shitty life. You can blame this on 'genteel southern traditions' but only if you have large quantities of shit lodged where your brain should be. 

Hollywood star Ryan Reynolds recently apologised for having had such a plantation wedding. Similarly, the Indian upper caste diaspora,

should apologize for not saying 'Some American University Departments are completely shit. The Indians they hire have shit for brains. If you want to be successful, don't waste your money and time studying there. Do something useful with your life.'

particularly those in positions of power like Nooyi,

she now works in the non-profit sector. She must back vocational training rather than 4 year degrees for the great mass of Americans. She must denounce these cretins.  

must reflect on the harm their selective and unthinking memorialisation of upper caste family traditions of privilege cause those without the caste access.

These cretins are wrong. Nooyi should tell the truth about how she rose. It is a fact that families like hers- or like that of Kamala Harris's Mom- interpreted the Hindu religion in a certain way such that academic success in STEM subjects was seen as spiritually and morally worthwhile. This meant Tardean mimetics with epistemically superior targets. However, sobriety, discipline, sacrifice, were also required. Talking worthless shite helps nobody. It damages your brain.  

Reynold’s apology for a plantation wedding

should provide a model for these two shitheads own apology for joining an utterly useless profession which actively damages the life-chances of those upon whom it preys.  

is part of recent a wave of high-profile awakening on the cultural glorification of symbols of segregation in the US. Popular music bands like Dixie Chics and Lady Antebellum have recently accepted their unthinking complicity in elevating narratives of superiority by using words like “Dixie” and “Antebellum” that are related to a sense of pride in a pre-emancipation South. A similar history of names relates to the Indian caste system.

Which, however, is not related to slavery. The fact is ex-slaves- like the Harris family- have the surnames of the owners, who were often also progenitors, of their ancestors. 

Upper caste Hindus often use surnames that are caste names.

The reverse is the case. Sub-castes adopt occupational or other honorific names. Iyer, Patel, Singh, Choudhry, Thakur, Gupta etc are not specific enough to pick out a particular endogamous community. The truly privileged have territorial names. But this was also true of the European aristocracy.

The early 20th century Dravidian movement in Southern India led by anti-caste reformers like E Ve Ramaswamy (Periyar) actively campaigned against this practice as a way to create space for individual identity and self-respect as opposed to identities based on caste power. As a result, the use of caste names like Iyer and Iyengar receded for a time among the Tamil community in India. Yet the practice is common now particularly among diaspora Indians.

Why? Because it was administratively convenient if you had settled in Bombay or elsewhere. As an honorific 'aya' was added to one's name anyway. Our practice is to use the father's name as an initial, unless one is very posh in which case there is territorial component as well, while your given name stands in the place of surname.  The Justice Party and Periyar and so on wanted to get rid of the feudal system as adapted by the Colonialists. 

At one time my Dad thought we should change our surname once back in India. Then he saw there was no need. Nobody cares about such things anymore. 

In testimonies collected by the Ambedkar King Study Circle California, several Dalit immigrants mention discomfort with frequent probing of names among Indian community groups and colleagues in order to discern caste identity.

This is quite true. But, I notice, high caste people hate it when I do the same thing to them- more particularly if they are related to me. This is because much of my information about Indian castes is derived from American academics. Thus I say 'Joseph Campbell says that Iyers chop off the heads of their sons when visiting their Kuladevam shrine'. The kids naturally start howling. I say 'don't worry. Your parents are all acharabrashta. You stand in no danger'. The parents say- 'Vivek, we don't chop off the head of our sons. We just shave their hair as an offering to the Deity. You too underwent this ceremony. Why are you trying to scare our kids just when we have booked our holiday in Chennai?' 

Caste is an uncomfortable business. Few of us keep up all the old rituals and customs. 

Similar to the rethink over words like Dixie and Antebellum, those with upper caste Indian heritage must reflect on the culture of names that evoke caste dominance.

Why stop there? Why not just adopt American names? Embrace Christianity. Identify as a Cherokee. 

In her comparison of white racial privilege to caste privilege Wilkerson mentions that while attending academic conferences on caste in the US, she began to recognise South Asians from dominant castes by the way they seemed to have a “certitude of being,” a confidence about their place in life. It is this certitude that Indira Nooyi exhibited when she prefaced her comments about her family by saying “we never lacked for anything, but we didn’t have much.”

Having 'certitude of being' is a good thing. Be confident. Show pride in your family. If you look nervous and try to hide facts about your family, people will jump to the conclusion that you make your money giving b.js at truck-stops. Your parents were jail-birds. Your kids are in care.  

In openly proclaiming both her Brahminical identity as well as her lack of class privilege Nooyi and many successful upper caste Indians signal a story of individual achievement where caste privilege either no longer exists or is rapidly fading.

No. Nooyi is saying Brahmins are superior to most Americans. She was able to rise higher than natives because of something special about her background. Her people were not materialistic. They were not greedy. But they were achievement oriented. 

Why did Nooyi say this? The answer is because it was in her interest to do so. Stakeholders would say to themselves 'this lady is unlikely to embezzle money or sexually harass all and sundry. Her family tradition is to pursue virtue and excellence. True, she comes from a shithole country. But she is one of a small minority of smart and virtuous people in that shithole country. Once people like her get to America, they can rise on the basis of merit.'

What would a Dalit entrepreneur say? 'I come from an Ambedkarite family. Let me tell you about Dr. Ambedkar. He got a scholarship from an Indian Prince to Columbia. Instead of just getting a degree, he got a PhD in fiscal policy. His dissertation was so good, the British Parliament relied on it. He also got a PhD in monetary policy from the LSE. He simultaneously qualified as a barrister. This was back in 1920 when you could count the number of Black people with a Doctorate on the fingers of one hand! Ambedkar joined the Viceroy's Council at a young age. He helped draft the Indian Constitution. Since then two members of my caste have become President of India purely on the basis of intellectual merit and integrity of character. Since most of us are engaged in grass-roots reform, few of us are represented in the higher ranks of private enterprise. But this is a profit opportunity for Corporations! Make a point of hiring Dalits. They will rise by merit, not use intrigue based on a sense of entitlement'.

What do these two shitheads say? Be ashamed of who you are. Only Whiteness matters in America. Be invisible. Change your name. If people think you don't look White start talking about Ryan Reynolds and his plantation wedding. Try to pass as African American.

The trouble with this strategy is that white women who were discovered to be 'passing' for Black were mocked and derided. That is why honesty is the best policy. But, always put your best foot forward. If you are confident and proud of your family, people will have confidence in you. They will respect your family. 

Yet the same open declaration of lower class origins would not be possible for someone from a Dalit background without a fear of their achievements being diminished as the outcome of undeserving affirmative action as seems to have been the experience in the Cisco case.

These cretins are wrong. The reason the Dalit man complained is because he knew he was as good or better than his bosses. He has advertised this for the world to see.  How we can help the good cause is by saying that all graduates of IIT have to pass the same exams. They are equal in merit though there is a provision for disadvantaged students to get remedial classes so as to catch up.  

Concluding her exploration of caste and race, Wilkerson mentions that racial privilege will continue to persist unless every one examines the ways they feed into the structure of white dominance in small and large ways through everyday actions.

Wilkerson is wrong but Wilkerson represents a venerable tradition within American discourse. It is wrong to try to jump on that bandwagon on the basis of having a dusky skin. These two cretins, or their parents, leveraged some degree of privilege within India to get the fuck away from that shithole. Now they are angling for 'affirmative action' by pretending they have some salience in a global battle against some shite or the other. 

Similarly upper caste Indian immigrants must reconcile an awareness of the structural privileges they have inherited even as they find ways to celebrate their personal successes and family histories.

This is what these two tossers refuse to do. Their parents may have emigrated on the basis of useful skills. Their sense of entitlement is so grotesque, they engage in 'extractive introjection'- unconscionably appropriating the psychic pain of oppressed people so as to virtue signal and gain 'affirmative action' for themselves. 

Shame on these stupid cretins! Where is Indra Nooyi and where are they? 

Subramaniyam Shankar on America's caste problem

Isabel Wilkerson's Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents seems set to change popular discourse re. Race in America. But, will it lead to criticism of the 'creamy layer' which has benefited from affirmative action? After all, Obama was a two term President. What did he do to improve things for African Americans?

Two years ago, Prof. Subramaniyan Shankar wrote an article titled 'Does America have a Caste system'? for 'The Conversation'. 

Before looking at that article, let us consider for a moment what would be involved in accepting 'Caste' as a factor in American social life. I think, it would mean abandoning 'one drop' rules. Thus affirmative action would be graded according to degree of racial admixture. On top of that, a distinction would be made between 'Educationally Forward' and 'Educationally Backward' castes. In other words, as happens in India, the 'creamy layer' would be excluded from the benefits of affirmative action. Furthermore, different 'dominant' groups would compete for 'Quotas' on the grounds that they were historically disadvantaged for geographical and historical reasons. The 'hillbilly' and the 'redneck' and the 'Okie' , as well as various ethnicities, may be able to document a history of relative deprivation. Rural populations, perhaps by reason of having more weightage in the Electoral College may be able to get European style support for the small farmer to level the playing field with Multi National agribusiness.

Would this be a good thing? Arguably it would reverse the 'hollowing out of the middle class' and combat 'despair deaths'. On the other hand, it may reduce economic dynamism while fuelling internecine conflict.

Is there a better way forward? Yes. Instead of relying on kinship or religious networks, we are better off paying for 'risk pooling'- i.e. insurance against relevant risks. This type of insurance must be 'incentive compatible' i.e. not feature moral hazard. However, wealthy countries can also afford compulsory insurance to provide a 'social minimum'. Interestingly, India is moving to 'last mile delivery' of a social minimum and this has been an important factor in the decline of casteism. Advanced countries should pursue 'Tiebout sorting' so that neighborhoods capitalize on their human capital endowment and public services are tailored to community needs. Mimetic effects then raise value added within communities.

Prof. Shankar takes a different view-

In the United States, inequality tends to be framed as an issue of either class, race or both.

Yet, inequality is wholly economic.

Consider, for example, criticism that Republicans’ new tax plan is a weapon of “class warfare,” or accusations that the recent U.S. government shutdown was racist.

In both cases, people of a particular class or race were hit harder in their pocket-book.

As an India-born novelist and scholar who teaches in the United States, I have come to see America’s stratified society through a different lens: caste.

Surely, this reflects a failure to assimilate? Even in India, Caste is less and less useful as a political instrument.

Many Americans would be appalled to think that anything like caste could exist in a country allegedly founded on life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. After all, India’s atrocious caste system determines social status by birth, compels marriage within a community and restricts job opportunity.

India adopted affirmative action much before the USA. It never had laws re. miscegenation. But, India is much poorer than America. Thus there is much less occupational mobility. It is poverty, not 'the caste system' which restricts life-chances. African Americans faced much worse statutory discrimination than any Indian, yet their 'talented tenth' got ahead simply through hard work and the pursuit of excellence. But, they faced much harsher obstacles. Compare Asa Philip Randolph's uphill struggle to Unionize African Americans with the relative success of Dalit Labor leaders like R.B More. Indeed, the 'trade union' aspect of caste, meant that all Indians had access to some countervailing power against the powerful in a manner which was anathema to the 'Gilded Age'  Plutocrats and their Pinkertons. As a case in point, consider what happened when the Tatas brought in an American to run their Jamshedpur plant. Even the British officials were appalled by the strong arm tactics- and open racism- of the American. Interestingly, a young Parsi with a Metallurgy degree from Pittsburgh grew so revolted by the bullying and racism of the European staff that he quit the Tatas and set up an independent Union. Unusually, he was jailed on trumped up charges but after Independence he was favored by the Government. My point is that America was much more hostile to organized Labor than India even under the British. No doubt, America changed in that respect but it seems to be going back to its bad old ways. This is the central question for America's 'disenfranchised'. Hopefully, Biden will offer a comprehensive 'New Deal' everyone can get behind. The last thing we need is talk of 'caste' or 'intersectionality' so as to divide the productive classes and render them politically null.

Indeed, it is foolish to see the problems of a very rich country through the lens of the problems of a very very poor country where only 15 million, out of a population of 1.3 billion, earn enough money to pay Income tax.

But is the U.S. really so different?

Yes. It is very very much richer.

What is caste?
I first realized that caste could shed a new light on American inequality in 2016, when I was scholar-in-residence at the Center for Critical Race Studies at the University of Houston-Downtown.
There, I found that my public presentations on caste resonated deeply with students, who were largely working-class, black and Latino.

The word 'Caste' is from Portuguese and Spanish. Moreover, within Black communities, there was an informal caste system based on degree of miscegenation. But much of the USA went in for a rigid 'one drop' rule. If you could 'pass', you had to cut yourself off from your family or else risk being 'outed'. If you had married a White spouse, that marriage would be dissolved and you could be sent to jail. Caste as a sociological phenomena does have a reality for the lived experience of certain ethnicities. Even among the Jews, there was a concern not to look 'Jewy'. The ubiquity of the 'nose-job' and the concern not to have 'frizzy' hair reflect this social pathology. On the other hand, for the dominant population- 70 percent, by some counts- there is no Caste. There are Whites, there are Blacks, and there are hyphenated Americans of various more or less acceptable sorts.

I believe that’s because two key characteristics differentiate caste from race and class.
First, caste cannot be transcended.

The opposite is the case. Caste, like Class, is transcended through hypergamy and wealth based 'cultural assimilation'. This is what happened in Europe. The bourgeoisie aped the manners of the Aristocracy, married their daughters to bankrupt Noblemen, and- where possible- bought themselves a title. In India, the process was more direct. Your family adopted Vegetarianism and paid Brahman priests to induct you into a higher 'Varna'. More recently, even the need for this was dropped. If your Dad is an IAS officer or your Uncle is a Minister, your caste goes up.

Unlike class, people of the “low” Mahar caste cannot educate or earn their way out of being Mahar.

Nonsense! Look at Dr. Devayani Khobargarde. Her dad was an IAS officer. She is a diplomat. Her husband's name is Rathore- a very Aristocratic surname indeed. This is a case of assortative mating of a type common on elite Ivy League campuses. It is ridiculous to suggest that Rathores look down on Mahars of her breeding. In any case, Mahars were a martial caste and valor equalizes all warriors.

Dr. Ambedkar, also a Mahar, was sent to America and England to get Doctorates and was appointed Military Secretary by the Ruler of Baroda. Unfortunately, the clerks in the Administration feared this 'new broom' and successfully boycotted Amebdkar who then went on to rise high in pre-Independence India. Later he was a member of the Cabinet and helped draft the Constitution. Finally, he became a 'Boddhisattva' popularizing a new type of Buddhist Religion.

No matter how elite their college or how lucrative their careers, those born into a low caste remain stigmatized for life.

The only 'high caste' who molested a Mahar, was the American Preet Bharara who subjected Devyani to a humiliating strip-search. But it was some stupid White Diplomatic Protection officer- i.e. a jumped up security guard- who had laid this devilish plan to falsely accuse a 'Mahar' of 'enslaving' a high caste Christian.

Caste is also always hierarchical: As long as it exists, so does the division of people into “high” and “low.”

This quite false. Many religious sects are endogamous and thus 'caste-like'. But they don't fit into a hierarchy. Thus in North London, you have Gujerati merchant castes living cheek by jowl with Orthodox Jewish castes. One is not higher than the other. As they do business together, they become friendly to each other.

That distinguishes it from race, in that people in a caste system cannot dream of equality.

Why not? Who cares whether their neighbor is or isn't practicing endogamy? One reason the Gujerati and the Haredi get along so well is that neither suspects the other's daughter of making eyes at their son, or vice versa. At the top end of the scale there are inter-faith marriages and, it may be, this also happens at the bottom end. But these are exceptions to the rule. Neither side thinks the other is plotting to improve their own status by inter-marriage.

Equality of opportunity, in a Market economy, depends on being able to access Investment Capital and getting Credit on equal terms. Endogamous social units are particularly good at this. Indeed, this was a feature of European modernization. People belonging to a particular sect would help each other and pool savings. Look at the Quakers- poor agricultural laborers in the main- who over the span of a couple of Centuries became plutocrats on a global scale. Endogamy was strictly insisted on by these upwardly mobile septs. Tolkein's widowed Mum, for some reason decided to become Catholic. Her family immediately cut her off without a penny. Thankfully, a Catholic priest was able to see to the boys education and so they were able to take their place in the world.

Ambedkar's plan for his community had to do with their first adopting a prestigious type of worship and then getting ahead through Education, Government employment, till they were in a position to emulate the Chamar millionaires of Kanpur and grow rich through the Market. This is the only recipe to get ahead. Consider the Patels. At one time they were considered lower than the Kunbis (the Gaekwad was of Kunbi origin) whose land they took on lease. Now the Patels bow their head to nobody- though they have still gained a small amount of affirmative action simply as a matter of muscle flexing rather than because they are desperately in need.
Consider the Netflix film 'Meet the Patels'. It makes it clear that a Patel can pick a bride from anywhere for Marriage. Why? This agricultural caste has succeeded in every field, not just in India, but across the globe.

It’s significant that the great mid-20th-century Indian reformer B. R. Ambedkar called not for learning to “live together as brothers and sisters,” as Martin Luther King Jr. did, but for the very “annihilation of caste.”

Ambedkar succeeded in annihilating noxious practices. Though he himself married a Brahmin Doctor, he did not advocate giving up endogamy for Mahars because he understood that as a kinship network, it should pool resources for economic, educational, and socio-political ends. Ambedkar was also a religious reformer concerned with giving his people the most progressive and prestigious form of Religion so as to establish them firmly as a Social Vanguard in India's ascent from bondage.

Caste, in other words, is societal difference made timeless, inevitable and cureless.

Nonsense! Europe had a Caste system- indeed, in parts of France and Spain, there was a type of 'Untouchability'- but that withered away with the ending of serfdom and the increasing economic power of the 'burghers' in the Cities.
In England, at one time, the English were a despised caste. 'Presentment of Englishry' meant that if the 'Crowner' could prove that a particular corpse was English, not Norman, then no further investigation needed to be performed. The Law was not concerned with protecting mere two-legged cattle.

Caste says to its subjects, “You all are different and unequal and fated to remain so.”

If so, why talk about it? Why try to import it into America? India has Caste. It is a shit-hole. If you've managed to get to America, why try to import that nonsense into a wealthy country overflowing with milk and honey?

Neither race nor class nor race and class combined can so efficiently encapsulate the kind of of social hierarchy, prejudice and inequality that marginalized Americans experience.

There is only one thing which encapsulates all the problems of 'marginalized Americans'. It is a lamentable lack of millions of dollars in the Bank.

Babasaheb Ambedkar fought for the ‘annihilation of caste’ believing that social equality could never exist within a caste system.

If Ambedkar wanted to annihilate caste, why did he get affirmative action for 'scheduled castes'? Why do Dalit parties want this to be perpetuated? The answer is that the scheme puts money in the pockets of some Dalits. Money is the great equalizer.

Is America casteist?
In Houston, that sense of profound exclusion emerged in most post-presentation discussions about caste.

Why? Because this guy teaches a worthless subject. Had he been showing them how to create and market an I-phone app so as to become millionaires there would have been a profound sense of inclusion, not exclusion, among his young audience. The problem with teaching Grievance Studies is that all you feed is Grievance. You destroy optimism. You destroy life-chances. Why do kids listen to some guy from a shit-hole country telling them America is bound to become a shit-hole? I think, it is because they are too well-bred for their own good.

As children, the students there noted, they had grown up in segregated urban neighborhoods – geographic exclusion that, I would add, was federal policy for most of the 20th century.

Why did they grow up in such neighborhoods? Chances are, because their parents could not afford to move. So the real problem here is money, not 'Caste'.

Many took on unpayable student loan debt for college,

Why were the loans 'unpayable'? Because the instruction was crap.

then struggled to stay in school while juggling work and family pressures, often without a support system.

This is also true of young people doing worthwhile courses. The solution is not far to seek. Get rid of shite courses and concentrate resources on those who are learning useful stuff.

Several students also contrasted their cramped downtown campus – with its parking problems, limited dining options and lack of after-hours cultural life – with the university’s swankier main digs.

These students have admirable spirit. Why can't the University teach them useful stuff?

Others would point out the jail across from the University of Houston-Downtown with bleak humor, invoking the school-to-prison pipeline.

So, these are smart kids. They have their wits about them. Thanks to them, no magical caste system will take root in America. It can fuck off back to India- except the Indians don't want it either.

Both the faculty and the students knew the power of social networks that are essential to professional success. Yet even with a college degree, evidence shows, Americans who grow up poor are almost guaranteed to earn less.

If the degree is crap, yes, that is indeed the case.

For many who’ve heard me speak – not just in Houston but also across the country at book readings for my 2017 novel, “Ghost in the Tamarind” – the restrictions imposed by India’s caste system recall the massive resistance they’ve experienced in trying to get ahead.

What actually happened in the Tamil Nadu, Prof. Shankar wrote about? The Anti-Brahmin movement triumphed by the Sixties. Sadly, the dominant castes continued to harass their Dalit labourers. This shows that Money mattered, Caste did not. The Brahmins were bullied and cowed. Yet, the Dalits at the bottom had it worse, not better. Only by geographical and social mobility could they get ahead. Incidentally, the Far Left proved even more lethal to the Dalits than the majoritarian Anti Brahminism of the dominant castes.

They have relayed to me, with compelling emotional force, their conviction that America is casteist.

They had no knowledge of casteism, more particularly 'Untouchability' and 'madi' rules of purity. They did not have power to assent to an untruth- viz. that in America, high caste people must have a bath after touching a low caste person. It would be unthinkable for a White person to have a Black cook or Hispanic maid.

India did have this type of craziness because of a primitive type of 'pathogen avoidance theory'. As medical science advanced, India started to get rid of the roots of this type of thinking. But India is very very poor. You can find all sorts of superstitions alive and well in the boondocks. By contrast, America is rich and educated. It is sheer stupidity to pretend that it has the same problems as backward parts of India.

Caste in the US and India
This notion is not unprecedented.
In the mid-20th century, the American anthropologist Gerald Berreman returned home from fieldwork in India as the civil rights movement was getting underway. His 1960 essay, “Caste in India and the United States,” concluded that towns in the Jim Crow South bore enough similarity to the North Indian villages he had studied to consider that they had a caste society.

Berreman deserves some praise for exposing the Cold War agenda of American Social Science- things like Project Camelot. Like Galbraith, he was alerting the Ivy League elite to the plight of poor rural folk in the Appalachians and the Deep South thus laying the foundations for Johnson's 'Great Society' reforms. However, like the Myrdals, Berreman did not have an Economic theory of what he observed. Ackerloff made a start in this direction- his Nobel speech reveals that his study of Caste helped him formulate 'efficiency wage' theory- but, to be frank, nobody has bothered to come up with a proper theory of Caste. Why? The thing is idiographic, not nomothetic. Anyway, studying Social Anthropology is a one way ticket to cretinism.

Granted, 2018 is not 1960, and the contemporary United States is not the segregated South. And to be fair, caste in India isn’t what it used to be, either. Since 1950, when the Constitution of newly independent India made caste discrimination illegal, some of the system’s most monstrous ritual elements have weakened.

What caused these changes? The answer is that Economic forces reshaped both countries for exigent reasons. America had to make its workforce more productive or risk losing the Cold War. India had to feed itself after Johnson made food aid conditional on support for the Vietnam War. In both countries, power shifted away from elites to Kaleckian 'intermediate' classes. In India, this meant Berreman's chum, the poet Ved Prakash Vatuk, lived to see his brother's pal, Charan Singh, become Prime Minister.

But that shift to 'intermediate' classes seems to be running out of steam. Both India and the US face a nightmare of social exclusion for smart, decent, young people whose life-chances have been destroyed by a Credentialized Ponzi scheme of a Higher Education racket.

The stigma of untouchability – the idea that physical contact with someone of lower caste can be polluting – for example, is fading. Today, those deemed “low caste” can sometimes achieve significant power. Indian President Ram Nath Kovind is a Dalit, a group formerly known as “untouchable.”

But Jagjivan Ram could have become P.M in the mid Seventies. K.R Narayanan, after a career in Diplomacy, became President in 1997. More significantly, Mayawati first became Chief Minister of the biggest Province in India in 1995.

Still, caste in India remains a powerful form of social organization. It segments Indian society into marital, familial, social, political and economic networks that are enormously consequential for success. And for a variety of practical and emotional reasons, these networks have proven surprisingly resistant to change.

The way forward is to work with existing endogamous communities to ensure they can mobilize resources to come forward under open markets. This means cultivating an entrepreneurial ethos rather than pursuing 'Grievance Studies'.

Casteist ideologies in America
At bottom, caste’s most defining feature is its ability to render inevitable a rigid and pervasive hierarchical system of inclusion and exclusion.

Caste does not have this magic power. Suppose it did. Then every country would try to introduce a Caste system so as to preserve the existing gap between 'Haves' and 'Have nots'.
By contrast, there have always been some nutters who say that the only way to bring about Equality is by abducting and raping women of the higher social class. This was actually tried in Zanzibar. The experiment did not turn out well.

What working-class Americans and people of color have viscerally recognized, in my experience, is that casteist ideologies – theories that produce a social hierarchy and then freeze it for time immemorial – also permeate their world.

If so 'working-class Americans' are as stupid as shit. They have given themselves an excuse to quit their jobs and shack up in a crack-house.

Take, for example, the controversial 1994 “The Bell Curve” thesis, which held that African-Americans and poor people have a lower IQ, thus linking American inequality to genetic difference.

This wasn't 'controversial'. It was plain wrong. On the other hand, with current methods, it is impossible to establish any meaningful result in this connection.

More recently, the white nationalist Richard Spencer has articulated a vision of white identity marked, caste-like, by timelessness and hierarchy.
“‘We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created unequal,’” he wrote in a July 2017 essay for an alt-right website. “In the wake of the old world, this will be our proposition.”

That's what happens when you take a guy with a room temperature I.Q and send him to fancy Liberal Arts Schools. The wonder is, he hasn't tried to bite his own head off.

Add to these ideological currents the evidence on the race gap in higher education, stagnant upward mobility and rising inequality, and the truth is damning. Five decades after the civil rights movement, American society remains hierarchical, exclusionary and stubbornly resistant to change.

In other words, America remains America. Only by imposing Caste on American Social Geography can America hope to turn into a shit-hole like India.

Caste gives Americans a way to articulate their sense of persistent marginalization.

So as to catch up with India on all relevant socio-economic indicators of well-being.

And by virtue of being apparently foreign – it comes from India, after all – it usefully complicates the dominant American Dream narrative.

Cool! Now a White guy can get to sue another White guy for caste discrimination on the grounds that the latter is a 'Boston Brahmin' while the former is a 'pariah' just coz he married his sister-mommy.

The U.S. has a class problem. It has a race problem. And it may just have a caste problem, too.

Why stop there? Why not add that the US has a problem with suttee (burning of widows) and thugee (strangulation of travellers) and everybody committing seppuku (slicing open their bowels) all over the place. America must listen to stupid Professors from shithole countries. Otherwise Witch Doctors will roam a land already overrun by Nazis and Fascists and the Spanish Inquisition.

Anupama Rao's Casteist Cretinism

Anupama Rao, a lecturer at Columbia educated in America, writes in Scroll-

In what is likely to be a precedent-setting case, California regulators filed a suit in the federal court on June 30 against Cisco Systems Inc, alleging that the company failed to prevent discrimination, harassment and retaliation against a Dalit engineer, anonymised as “John Doe” in the filing.

The Californian DFEH claims that Dalits are different to non Dalit Indian by reason of darker color. Thus racial discrimination has occurred.

Interestingly DFEH had previously given a 'right to sue' letter to a Kapu Naidu engineer who had been terminated by a Kamma Naidu boss. It seems any Indian can claim Caste discrimination with respect to any other Indian even if they appear to be of the same Caste because there are minute variations within such groupings. In the UK, an 'Arain' chef lost a Tribunal case because his 'higher caste' boss was found to be 'Arain' himself. Both were Muslim Pakistanis. God alone knows what would have happened if the Boss had been a Jat!

The Cisco case bears the burden of making anti-Dalit prejudice legible to American civil rights law as an extreme form of social disability attached to those formerly classified as “Untouchable.”

Sadly, the Law is unconcerned with 'extreme forms of social disability'. It would be irrational and unfair to stigmatize a person because their mother was a prostitute or because their father is in jail for fraud. But such 'social disability' is not currently 'a protected class'.

 Thus the only question here is whether Dalits are or are not a different race from non-Dalit Indians. If the Court decides that Dalits are indeed a different race, then Cisco has been negligent and permitted discriminatory conduct. If not, Cisco gets off scott free. It appears that their legal counsel is confident that Dalits are not of a distinct race or religion from non Dalit Indians. It is not illegal for a supervisor to take a dislike to an employee and to treat him shabbily. It is illegal if this is done because of race, religion, gender or age.

This does not mean that an employee who has been treated unfairly has no recourse in law to secure damages. However, they would have to pay a lawyer to take the case to court. The DFEH has no remit.

However, if the Court finds Dalits are a separate race, then they become a protected class on their own.

Herein lies its key legal significance. The suit implicitly compares two systems of descent-based discrimination – caste and race – and translates between them to find points of convergence or family resemblance.

No. The suit is lost in advance if it makes such an 'implicit comparison'. Suppose the Partners of a Law Firm discover that the new hire is not, as they thought, an heiress. Actually her mother is a domestic servant. The girl got ahead on her own merits. If this girl is unfairly discriminated against on the grounds that her people were 'white trash', then this is not covered by the type of law under consideration. This is unfair and there may be other remedies but the DFEH can't get involved.

The charge of caste discrimination also challenges the myth of the South Asian diaspora as a monolithic community and a model minority, the “other one percent”.

Sadly, this is not the case. It merely shows that some Indians are considered greatly superior to others- Dalits in particular- in their own country. This creates 'High Caste Privilege'. It increases the incentive for Dalits to conceal their identity. Consider Tom Wolfe's essay 'Mid-Atlantic Man' about a working class Englishman who is treated as an equal by plutocrats on the other side of the pond. So he develops a 'Mid-Atlantic' persona. Wolfe, whose own persona was that of an aristocratic Southern Gentleman, thought the 'Mid Atlantic Man' would be squeezed out when Newport plutocrats met their social equals in England. As a matter of fact, after 'Big Bang', when a lot of American Merchant Banks set up in London, 'Mid-Atlantic Man' did fine. A Liverpudlian or Geordie accent was as 'posh' as an Etonian drawl.

I don't really think American Dalits- who have done well on merit- will want to hide their identity. In any case, they can say 'I'm the same caste as the Indian President'. That ends the matter.

What of the 'model minority' tag? Will this be damaged? Of course not. All that matters is that these guys keep earning well and stay out of jail.

The case makes caste internationally visible as the practice of social exclusion that is materially consequential.

No. Nobody believes that Cisco gives a damn about what type of benighted dot Indian you are. The only thing they are concerned with is your work product. Still, it would be cool if there were another 'protected class'. Why should the Irish not gain such status? How about the Poles and the Italians and so forth?

A little historical background will assist in the comparative work of discerning the consequences of untouchability in a context geared to findings about the very different category of race.

Anupama Rao is described as a Historian. Thus any historical background she presents will be utterly false.

Reservations are a unique form of civil rights law that defines caste as a system of historical discrimination resulting in enduring group disadvantage, or social and economic “backwardness”. Until recently, reservations were organised around a commitment to “equality of outcome” and not merely “equality of opportunity”, as is the case in the United States.

Rao is writing for an Indian audience. They know very well that powerful castes can gain Reservations. They also know that the benefits of reservations for Dalits are monopolized by the traditionally higher status, better educated and wealthier Dalit sub-castes.
Talk of 'equality' is a joke in a country where only a tiny minority can gain Government employment.

Reservations in Southern and Western India date to the late colonial period, and predate the better-known system that followed passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in the United States by nearly a century.

This is nonsense. What 'Reservation' was there in 1880? What about 1890? The fact is Mahars lost employment in the Army in 1885 despite their valour and loyalty. Kohlapur did introduce reservations in its tiny territory about 1900. The Justice Party in the Twenties did something similar in the 1920s.

Article 17 of the Indian Constitution separately abolishes untouchability and prescribes a system of compensatory discrimination for its victims and their descendants, including an unusual and robust set of criminal law provisions – such as the Prevention of Atrocities Act – that were instituted to protect these communities from violence by dominant upper-castes.

India is a poor country. It preferred to pass nice sounding laws rather than attempt to enforce them.

Constitutional commitments to social and economic advancement of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are the governing template for extending reservations to other castes.

Thus, there is no bar for supposedly economically backward high prestige castes gaining Quotas.

What is more, Indian law courts have understood the commitment to remediation as absolute.

Nonsense! No court holds any law to be other than defeasible. Indian law courts only hold the 'Basic Structure of the Constitution' to be inviolable. But what that Basic Structure is, nobody can say.

So much so that interpretive leeway has turned on the question of eligibility, on defining the rightful beneficiaries of preferential treatment.

This is not true. If it were 'social and economic disadvantage' which is absent in the Dalit 'creamy layer', just as it is absent in the OBC 'creamy layer', would militate for withdrawal of 'preferential treatment'.

In contrast, courts in the United States work through judicial scrutiny to balance equal protection – read “non-discrimination” – against commitments to affirmative action.

Only a small proportion of Indians have access to the Courts. In America this is not the case. One result is that American laws reflect reality to some degree. Indian laws are pure pie in the sky.

However, it must be understood that 'protected classes' in the US are not subject to any test re. socio-economic advantage. This means a high status woman is still protected by reason of gender. A white man may be protected by reason of being White, though no disability attaches to Whiteness. One result of having a clear and 'uni-dimensional', not 'instersectional', criteria for protection is that the Law actually works though, no doubt, enforcement Agencies lack resources to ensure the vast majority of the discriminated against gain any effective protection.

Ironically, affirmative action policies that are remedial in their conception are now criticised, whether in India or the United States, for introducing exception and inequality in the domain of liberal equality.

How is this ironic? It is natural to criticize programs which don't benefit you personally. Rao should say, 'Because people are selfish, it is understandable- not ironic- that they protest against progressive measures from which they don't see themselves personally benefiting'. It would be worth adding 'This is short sighted. Removing wage, price, and service provision discrimination is allocatively and dynamically efficient. There is less dead weight loss to Society. Growth is faster. In the long run, everybody gains.'

It is true that there is a very wide gap between progressive legislation and equitable outcome in case law.

I don't understand this statement. Is she saying the Courts don't decide cases on the basis of legislation? The problem here is that Courts alone have the authority to interpret the law. The opinion of some 'historian' is not germane. Equity is a separate source of law. An equitable remedy may be applied, in certain jurisdictions, where the Law falls short by reason of its generality.

However, this is not the reason why the state is actively rolling back civil rights legislation, both in India and in the United States.

This is a paranoid assertion wholly unfounded in fact. Does this cretin really believe India is reinstituting untouchability? What about America? Does Rao get shunted to the back of the bus because only white people are allowed to sit in the front? Has Jim Crow really come back?

In the process and as a consequence, those who suffer the disability of caste or race are now viewed as the undeserving beneficiaries of affirmative action policy, while the true beneficiaries of inherited privilege redefine their privilege as “merit”.

Viewed by whom? Presumably the author- what a nasty person she must be!

Let us take a brief look at the details of the suit with the foregoing in mind.

But 'the foregoing' has no bearing at all on the case. It is ignorant, paranoid, nonsense.

The federal suit filed by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing follows on two inconclusive internal reviews conducted by Cisco. The complaint describes a hostile work environment that resulted in “John Doe” receiving less pay, fewer opportunities for advancement, and otherwise suffering inferior terms and conditions of employment.

That is not germane. The suit says Iyer 'outed' Doe as Dalit. Furthermore Dalits are darker than non-Dalits and thus constitute a different race. Thus the 'outing' of Doe was similar to what would happen if a light complected African American was 'outed' as Black according to the Jim Crow 'one drop' rule. However, the fact is, Indians know that a lot of people enter on OBC and other quotas. Thus, firstly, not being 'general category' does not mean you are necessarily Dalit. You may be the son of a Minister from a dominant caste and have gotten in on the Sports quota. You may be of very high caste but may have paid a bribe to get a S.C certificate. 

Secondly, Dalits aren't really darker complected than non Dalits. In Tamil Nadu, one Dalit Caste is of North Indian origin and thus has lighter skin. In Punjab, some Brahmins are darker than some Dalits.

Incidentally, if Romanis are protected under US laws than Indian Doms are protected because they are the stem race of the Romanis. But this protection would not extend to other Dalits unless the Court finds they too are a separate race. But on what basis could they do so? Current scientific opinion is that there was much inter-marriage 3000 years ago. Endogamy may be traced back only 2000 years. But if this is enough to constitute racial difference then every Indian jati is a protected class. Iyer can say Sharma or Seth or even Namboodri discriminated against him. This would be super cool. As I have explained elsewhere, I could sue my Daddy and my Mummy and my Sister and my Son and even myself for discrimination!

The suit names Cisco and two employees, Sundar Iyer and Ramana Kompella, who served in a supervisory capacity over John Doe at varying times. Of eight charges in all, Cisco is charged with multiple counts of “Retaliation,” “Failure to Take All Reasonable Steps to Prevent Discrimination, Harrassment, and Retaliation,” and “Discrimination on the Basis of Religion, Ancestry, National Origin/Ethnicity, and Race/Color.” All three defendants are charged with “Harassment on the Basis of Religion, Ancestry, National Origin/Ethnicity, and Race/Color.”

The problem is, Iyer knew Doe from College and hired him. Then, a year later, Doe accused him of outing him as Dalit. Iyer's attitude to him changed. Was this dislike- which is legal- or was it discrimination- which isn't? Cisco thinks it was dislike. A boss can victimize his employee who then has a choice whether to pursue a remedy under the law of contract, or simply quit and find a nicer employer.

DFEH is claiming Dalits are a Race. If they are right, then so are Iyers. If Smith, the M.D of the Company promotes Namboodri, not Iyer, Iyer can go to DFEH alleging racial discrimination. Smith may not know the difference between Iyers and Namboodris but, in law, they are now separate races. Smith had a duty to listen to Iyer whine about how Namboodris (save monks) can't accept cooked food from Iyers. We are untouchables. Boo hoo!

The social circumstances leading up to the suit are equally revealing. John Doe is an IIT graduate, like the defendants.

He was a batchmate of the guy who hired him.

He worked on a team of entirely Indian, largely upper-caste employees. 

This is irrelevant. Either he belonged to a different race from them or he did not. If he did not, his position is similar to a person of stigmatized descent- e.g. his mother was a prostitute, his father was a jail-bird- being unfairly harassed by people of the same race as himself. 

It is possible that snobby, 'legacy' Ivy League alumni in the Workplace create a hostile environment for a chap who went to Night School and rose up by his own efforts. This is repugnant, but it isn't illegal because social class does not give rise to 'protected' status.     

He was subject to a series of discriminatory incidents that escalated in severity starting with public exposure of his caste identity in late 2016 by Sundar Iyer.

No. The complaint says that discriminatory incidents arose after he confronted Iyer about 'outing' him as a 'quota' student. Iyer may have been retaliating for what he perceived as insubordination. Or he may simply have taken an irrational dislike to the fellow. That is repugnant but not illegal.

During Cisco’s first review, Iyer is alleged to have told John Doe’s colleagues that he was not from the “main list”, thus publicising Doe’s identity as someone who has derived the benefit of reservations. No action was taken, however, and the Office of Employee Relations is alleged to have noted that “caste discrimination was not unlawful.”

Because caste is not race. It is not illegal for a blue blooded European Aristocrat to discriminate against a fellow European of plebeian origin. Nor is it illegal for 'Boston Brahmins' to discriminate against 'Trailer Trash'. There may be a breach of contract or other legal remedy. But it wouldn't be something the FCEH could get involved in.

During the second review, witnesses testified that Iyer sidelined Doe from a project and questioned his competence. Doe was isolated from the group, rejected a raise, and denied the chance to apply for a position that would have entailed a raise and a promotion. However, Cisco’s second review also found no grounds to support claims of caste-based and related discrimination, or evidence of retaliation against Doe.

Caste-based discrimination would not have been actionable. Retaliation for rudeness- e.g. confronting a boss in a manner he does not like- is not per se illegal. Thus, unless the Court finds Dalits are a different race- which is good news for Iyers and Chettiars and Namboodris because they can all start accusing each other of Racism and demanding H.R take action- Employers are off the hook.

The case will now be decided in the court of law. However, it is worth noting that debates about caste privilege, anger against the “underserving” beneficiaries of reservation, and anxiety about the introduction of the caste question into the diaspora are rife within the upper caste discussions I am privy to. Why so?

Because you are talking to people as stupid and ignorant as yourself. Either each endogamous jati is a Race or none are. They belong to a common stock. There may be hierarchical differences between them. But hierarchical differences are not racial differences. They don't constitute a 'protected group'. It may be that 'trailer trash' should be a protected group if it is true that the upper class Whites look down on them. It may also be that having a Dad in prison for fraud should give you protected class status. Imagine yourself working for a White Shoe Law firm. Everybody loves you because your Dad is the billionaire Bernie Madoff. Then he goes to jail for fraud. Everybody suddenly hates you. There is a hostile work environment. You are 'constructively dismissed' in an unfair manner. The State can't help you because there is no discrimination against a protected group. You could get damages if you had a good lawyer. But how will you pay her fee? You may end up flipping burgers.

The Cisco case addresses caste as inherited privilege, one that upper-castes carry with them and make use of to derive material benefit in the United States even as they deny that caste matters.

No. The Cisco trial is about whether Dalits are or are not a separate race. This is important for South Asians. Every endogamous jati would gain protected status. Remember, Rich White Men are a protected class in so far as they are White and they are Men. If Poor Black Women create a hostile workplace for him and he complains to H.R, they have to take action. Any 'retaliation' by Poor Black Women adds to the offense. So the Rich White Dude can, in theory at least, get Government lawyers to secure him a payout which may be very large because his emoluments are very high. This may seem unfair. But this is the law. It is always a double edged sword.

Instead, John Doe is presented as suffering the burden of caste. The fact of his being a Dalit and thus, the beneficiary of affirmative action policy in India might confirm the view that his work is not up to par.

Rao is perpetuating a myth. All IIT graduates pass the same exams. In any case the guy was an industry veteran. If his work product was sub-par why did Iyer hire him?

Rao seems prejudiced against Dalits. It is unfortunate that Scroll has published this rubbish. But then its readership is 'upper caste'. Under the guise of being a 'Justice Warrior' Rao is perpetuating stereotypes.

Though non-Indian coworkers might remain unaware, the caste name – and caste identity, more generally – continue to operate as secret knowledge that can be “outed” at will to stigmatise Dalit-Bahujans.

Look at Rao's mindset! She thinks people who can see your work product will change their opinion on the basis of the fact that you father was poor. There is something wrong with this 'Historian's' brain.

Their social reverberations extend to membership in regional, and oftentimes caste-specific, cultural organisations, commitments to exclusivity in food and marriage, and most important of all, the denial of caste as an operative factor in contexts where merit is supposed to prevail.

No 'social reverberations' arise in the manner suggested. Some Caste Associations will flourish, others will fall by the wayside. This cretin may be able to virtue signal on this issue to her equally cretinous students but those students won't get well paid jobs. They will be flipping burgers while waiting for the Revolution.

By charging Cisco with responsibility for creating a hostile environment where a historically-discriminated minority is again excluded on the basis of religious identity – caste is here seen as an integral element of Hindu religion – national origin/ethnicity and race, the federal suit implicates a globally-renowned, private corporation, Cisco, with duty to equal protection and diversity.

But nobody except some 'woke' nutcases with nothing better to do will bother with this issue. Cisco is going to have to change its business model any way because America does not want any more South Asians.

Rao may be able to make a little money lecturing on caste. But her students won't make any money at all. After paying off their Student Loans, they will find they are worse off than if they had taken a course in Basket Weaving instead.

In the United States, policies of affirmative action are related to but distinct from a commitment to multicultural diversity.

There is no commitment to multicultural diversity as opposed to guarantees of different types of liberty.

Equal protection of diversity/difference, such as religious differences, must be distinguished from inequality that arises through historic relations of domination, subordination, and hierarchy.

But historic relations of dominations are stochastically disrupted. In an Advanced Capitalist Economy most inequality is the result of educational, career, and portfolio choice decisions.

This case poses the question of how respect for Hindu religion might coexist with recognising socio-economic inequality justified in the name of religion.

The answer to this question is that respect for religion can coexist with anything at all if you believe it will get you to Heaven where you'll be united with Mummy and Daddy and the neighbor's cat you liked to stroke.

Rao's writing about this case poses the question of how respect for her and the Department where she teaches can coexist with recognizing that she and it are as stupid as shit.

Though far-reaching in conception and intent, reservations in India have been stymied by their focus on fast-vanishing public sector employment. They have steered clear of legislating equality in the private sector. The petition against Cisco provides a model, one that will need to translated back to suit Indian conditions.

This is nonsense. India has at last realized that even if a few thousand get good jobs, the country as a whole will suffer unless girls in rural areas are shifted into giant factory dormitories. India has to go the way of China or forget about a 'middle income trap', it will be a Malthusian shithole.

A senior Indian engineer in the United States whom I know, on reading the suit, remarked that it should be essential reading for every Human Relations department in this country, to alert them that there could be minorities within minorities, and that Indians are far from being a uniform or homogeneous group.

H.R departments have to keep abreast of changes in the law. If Dalits are declared a separate race, then- as this engineer points out- any endogamous jati is a separate race.  That way madness lies. There will be a test case decided in a Superior Court or else there will be legislation to rollback this stupidity.

Alternatively, the law will be circumvented by outsourcing. That's probably what's going to happen anyway.

Indians today constitute the highest earning and best-educated ethnic group, including Whites.

This will change as they abandon STEM subjects for cozy gigs in Grievance Studies.

Not surprisingly, they are overwhelmingly from well-educated and upper caste backgrounds.

Why? Because the US did its best to keep out the poor and ill-educated. Still, unless immigration rules re. family reunification are changed, Indian-Americans will revert to the mean quickly enough.

Despite their inherited privilege, they have fashioned an American success story for themselves,

No. Because of some inherited qualities they succeeded to some extent.  One of those inherited qualities was being as poor as shit and thus wanting to work hard in boring jobs so as to earn dollars and buy nice shiny things.

of struggling against the odds to achieve their status.

'against the odds'? No! People migrated to the US because the odds were in favour of their being much better off than if they stayed in India. This woman is a cretin.

This case suggests that a healthy dose of skepticism is required.

Why? A guy who doesn't get promoted goes to HR and then gets the Government to sue his employer for him. This shows he is smart. There is no reason to be skeptical about him.

As for Rao and her ilk, we may once have been skeptical about their intelligence. We aren't skeptical now. It is obvious they are ignorant, careerist, cretins whose virtue signalling can only harm America or India or any other country which listens to them.

Post Script- 

California dropped the case against Cisco. It turned out Iyer was a nice guy who shared his bonuses with his underlings. The message here is 'don't hire a guy who might accuse of sexual molestation or caste discrimination or some such thing. Also don't share your bonuses. Just make your underlings work hard so as to generate profits for the company.' 

The Cisco Caste discrimination case

Update- It seems DFEH gave a right to sue letter to another South Indian who alleges he was terminated because he was a Kapu Naidu by a boss who was a Kamma Naidu. It seems, allowing Caste to be a criteria for Discrimination lawsuits means no Indian can be put in charge of any other Indian even if they belong to what appears to be the same caste! 

The Californian Department of Fair Employment and Housing is suing Cisco for the casteist behaviour of two of its employees. (update. The case collapsed. There was no casteist behaviour.)

 However, the following statement it makes is misleading.

Complainant Doe’s ancestry, national origin/ethnicity, and race/color is Dalit Indian. Doe has a darker complexion relative to other persons of non-Dalit Indian descent.

There is no connection between skin color and Caste. North Indians are fairer than South Indians. Some Dalits in Tamil Nadu are of Northern origin and have lighter skin than the indigenous High Castes. But some Punjabi Brahmins have darker skin than some 'Mazhabis'.

Doe’s religion is Hindu. As a Dalit, he also is known as being from the Untouchable or Scheduled Caste.

Sadly, Religion is irrelevant. Discrimination against Dalits exists even in Christianity- as Sujatha Gilda's book 'Ants among Elephants' records.

29. Doe has over 20 years of experience in the software development lifecycle process at startups and established companies. In or around September 2015, Iyer recruited and hired Doe as a Principal Engineer for Cisco because of his expertise and experience. As the head of the Cisco team, Iyer hired and supervised Doe, having the authority to control his day-to-day assignments, discipline, discharge, direct, and transfer Doe. Upon information and belief, Iyer is Brahmin.

Iyer and Doe attended the same IIT at the same time. This suggests that they knew each other or had friends in common. Iyer must have thought well of Doe or else he would not have hired him. The question is why did Doe's career not progress as well as might have been expected?

30. In or around October 2016, two of Doe’s colleagues told Doe that Iyer informed them that Doe was from the “Scheduled Caste” (Dalit) and enrolled in the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) through affirmative action. Iyer was aware of Doe’s caste because they attended IIT at the same time. 31. In or around November 1, 2016, Doe confronted Iyer about disclosing Doe’s caste to other Cisco employees. Iyer asked Doe who claimed he made such a comment. After Doe shared the names of his colleagues, Iyer denied the comment and stated Doe’s colleagues were not telling the truth. 32. In or around November 21, 2016, Doe contacted Cisco’s human resources (HR) and Employee Relations to file a discrimination complaint against Iyer. 33. Six days after Doe’s first contact with Cisco’s HR and employee relations, Iyer told Doe he was taking away Doe’s role as lead on two technologies. 34.

I think this is the reason DFEH took the case. First there is  a complaint and then there is retaliatory action.

On or around November 28, 2016, Iyer promoted two of Doe’s colleagues to head engineering roles, one of whom was Defendant Kompella. Kompella was made Head of Southbound Engineering. Upon information and belief, Kompella is Brahmin or at least of a higher caste than Dalit. With this new title, Defendant Kompella received a raise of approximately 15% or more. As the Head of Southbound Engineering, Kompella had the ability to direct the day-to-day assignments and recommend employment actions for those on his team, including Doe. 35. On or around November 28, 2016, Iyer also removed team members from the third technology Doe was working on and did not formally integrate the third technology into either team headed by the two new Heads of Engineering. As a result of these changes, Doe’s role was reduced to that of a system architect as an independent contributor, and he was isolated from all his colleagues. 36. On or around December 8, 2016, Doe submitted a written complaint about Iyer’s disclosure of Doe’s caste, Doe’s complaint to Iyer, and Iyer’s retaliatory employment actions, including the sudden changes to Doe’s job duties. He also complained that Iyer made discriminatory comments to a colleague and about a job applicant because of the applicant’s religion (Muslim).

Doe made a written complaint after retaliatory measures were taken against him. It is puzzling that Cisco took no action. Doe was an industry veteran. He had been hired as a Principal Engineer by Iyer himself. Either Iyer had hired a pal of his who wasn't up to the mark or else Doe was paying the price of standing up to his boss.

37. Cisco’s Employee Relations Manager, Brenda Davis, conducted the investigation into Doe’s December 2016 complaint. Davis’ internal investigation notes revealed that Iyer admitted that he told Doe’s colleagues that Doe was not on the “main list.” Among those from India, it is commonly known that students not on the main list are admitted to IIT through an affirmative action program designed for those from the “Scheduled Castes” or those outside the caste system. Therefore, stating that someone is not on the “main list” effectively reveals their caste.

No. Politically dominant 'Other Backward Castes' also have quotas. But this does not affect the quality of the students. They may be allowed to complete the course over a longer period but they still have to pass the same exams.

Despite this, Davis took no further action and failed to even contact relevant witnesses or Doe. 38. Cisco Employee Relations staff, including Davis, also indicated that caste discrimination was not unlawful. As a result, Davis did not recommend any corrective action against Iyer. Iyer also admitted that he made a joke about Doe’s co-worker’s religion and talked about an applicant’s Muslim related appearance. Still, Davis did not recommend any corrective action. On or around February 2, 2017, Davis closed her investigation finding all of Doe’s complaints were unsubstantiated. 39. Iyer’s retaliatory efforts continued. He further isolated Doe from the team when he disparaged Doe to other employees, misrepresented that Doe did not perform his job adequately, and told Doe’s team members that they should avoid working with him. 40. On or around March 2, 2017, Doe sought review of Davis’ investigation findings. After repeated attempts to have Cisco review Davis’ findings, HR official Tara Powell finally reopened the investigation on or around April 25, 2017. Powell re-interviewed one of the employees to whom Iyer The employee stated that he learned about Doe’s caste but refused to tell Powell how he knew, noting that he did not want to say anything about Iyer because they had known each other for a long time. He also stated that he thought Doe was being treated unfairly and that he was very technically able but was being excluded at work. Powell did not attempt to contact for an interview the other employee who witnessed Iyer’s disclosure of Doe’s caste. Two additional witnesses told Powell that they feared losing their jobs or otherwise being retaliated against for speaking out against Iyer. One of those employees also told Powell that he thought Doe was very competent and asked appropriate questions, but that Iyer was setting Doe up to push him out of the company. 41. Powell’s investigation also uncovered a spreadsheet that showed anticipated yearly raises, bonuses, and restricted stock unit awards that Iyer had promised Doe. These raises, bonuses, and awards never materialized when promised. But Powell also found that four out of the eight other team members received raises in or around October 2016. 42. In or around August 2017, Powell concluded she could not substantiate any caste-based or related discrimination or retaliation against Doe. Powell, however, determined that Iyer mocked another employee’s religion, and thus violated Cisco’s Code of Conduct. Still, no immediate corrective action was taken. 43. Despite Doe’s repeated attempts to bring the caste-based and related discrimination, harassment, and retaliation to Defendant Cisco’s attention in 2016 and 2017, Cisco failed to recognize casteism as a form of unlawful religion-, ancestry-, national origin/ethnicity-, and race/color-based discrimination or harassment under state or federal law and failed to conduct a thorough investigation. While the investigation confirmed Doe was increasingly isolated and treated unfairly by Iyer and Kompella, Cisco failed to take timely and appropriate corrective action. Moreover, Cisco’s training was deficient in that it did not adequately train managerial employees on workplace discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, nor did the company prevent, deter, remedy, or monitor casteism in its workforce.

It may well be that Americans might not understand 'casteism'. But surely Cisco's HR department would know that retaliation against an employee who has made a complaint is wrong?

44. On or around February 26, 2018, Kompella became the Interim Head of Engineering for Cisco’s team after Iyer stepped down. In his new role, Kompella supervised Doe and continued to -11- Cal. Dept. Fair Empl. & Hous. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., et al. Civil Rights Complaint – Employment Discrimination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 discriminate, harass, and retaliate against Doe by, for example, giving him assignments that were impossible to complete under the circumstances. Kompella also began requiring Doe to submit weekly status reports to him and Senior Vice President/General Manager Tom Edsall. 45. On or around May 21, 2018, Rajeev Gupta took over from Kompella and became the Director of Engineering. In that role, Gupta supervised Doe. 46. Two months later, in or around July 2018, Doe applied for the position of Director of Research and Development Operations with Gupta. According to Gupta’s interview notes, he ranked Doe as “below average” in six out of eight categories and as “meeting requirements” in the remaining two categories. But Gupta’s assessment of Doe was improperly influenced by Iyer’s retaliatory employment actions. Gupta specifically cited Doe’s lead role being taken away and his job reduced to that of an independent contributor in November 2016. Gupta’s notes also reflected Iyer’s retaliatory criticisms about Doe’s work product, social skills, and insubordination. Doe did not get the position. 47. The effect of the unlawful employment practices complained of above was to deprive Doe of equal employment opportunities, and otherwise adversely affect his status as employees, because of religion, ancestry, national origin/ethnicity, and race/color. 48. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were intentional. 49. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to Doe’s federally and state-protected civil rights

Gupta, presumably, is North Indian while Iyer and Kompella, presumably, are South Indian. Gupta may have thought their assessment of Doe was reliable. It may be that Iyer and Kompella are not 'casteist' themselves but that they took against Doe because he asserted himself. Iyer hired Doe. He must have thought he was good at his job. Why did Doe's career fail to develop? It may be that Iyer has evidence that Doe was not doing a good job. But why did he not supply that information to the H.R Department? American firms are notorious for their 'hire and fire' work culture. But, surely, a Manager who hires a dud has to take some responsibility?

Cisco seems to have swept things under the carpet. They are now paying a high price for this error. This case has made international head-lines.