Dear Shri Sangom sir, we all have our opinions and are free to express them. But you have made some disparaging comments about me. I want to challenge you to put up some evidence for them.
In as much as I have repeatedly welcomed discussion of U.S. racism, and have started this thread for the very purpose, you continuing to express this view that somehow I want to close the discussion about racism, albeit with the caveat "seem" is deplorable. Using the same "seem" caveat, and with due respects, I think you repeating this canard seem to be dishonest.
This is another uncalled for nasty speculation. I challenge you to cite anything I have said that can be construed as offering justification of racism. The reason you give, "because you have/had good life in US" is downright sickening. I request you to refrain from making such baseless allegations.
One more baseless comment. I am really sorry you are doing this. I have no problem if you think racism in the U.S. is much worse than casteism in India, that is obviously your prerogative, but if you want to cast aspersions like the ones you have made in this post, then I have to demand you put up some evidence. Or else, all these personal stuff from you is no more than hot air.
Thank you ....
Dear Shri nara,
I am trying to give below, in some detail, the various relevant posts in the two threads, “Discrimination:can it be stopped” and “Racism in the US”. It is somewhat long because I have tried to give the developments as they took place, to the best of my ability and according to how I understood each one of the posts and/or portions thereof.
My only purpose in so doing is to not appear as though I had no answers to the comments made above by you; you may or may not be convinced about these or by my arguments/remarks.
30-11-2011, 03:10 AM
#1
prasad1
Discrimination - can it be stopped?
According to UN:
Understanding Discrimination - print
Your birth, religion, race, height, nationality, language, education, money and even your gender are factors that most people make quick judgments about. Unfortunately, many of these judgments are based on biases and assumptions.
Can we eliminate or should we even try to eliminate discrimination? I do not think it is possible.
The discrimination outlawed by the country and some other birth based discrimination should be stopped.
The society should change through education and economics.
In US social discrimination goes on, forced integration is very difficult. The middle class runs from poor neighborhood. Even in Football teams the black players and white players do not integrate.
There is strong enforcement of laws against discrimination based on race, color, gender, or disability in housing, jobs etc.
30-11-2011, 05:11 AM
#2
kunjuppu
prasad,
are we not defined by our sense of discrimination. i mean the word in a 'meaning neutral' term.
we discriminate against somebody, something, some ideas, peoples, religions.
same way, we discriminate or prejudiced for somebody, something, some ideas, peoples, religions.
that is what makes us humans. even the goodest of people hate. they hate the bad, dont they?
so what you are demand, is unreasonable.
n'est pas?
My comments
This, coming from Shri Kunjuppu, soon after, and as the first response to the OP, appeared (and still continues to appear) as a defence of discrimination – whether in a “meaning neutral” form or otherwise. I sensed that this unusual kind of response must have some reason.
30-11-2011, 06:57 AM
#4
biswa
But the big reservation debate aside, how many people here have really been hurt by discrimination? I must confess that I have not been victimized by discrimination (yet). Isolated nastiness by various groups yest, but not discrimination. Of course I don't care if white people invite me to their SuperBowl parties or will ever consider my son as a dating option for their daughter. Other than that I think if you have something to offer: money, brains, hard work, you should get by fine.
Here Shri Biswa commences the arguments in favour of not making any discussion about discrimination. He says ‘ I must confess that I have not been victimized by discrimination (yet). Isolated nastiness by various groups yest, but not discrimination.’ and makes the suggestion that if one has something to offer: money, brains, hard work, one should get by fine. But that (yet) is an honest pointer to the fact that there is no guarantee that one will not be victimized by discrimination.
30-11-2011, 10:33 AM
#5
sangom
Dear Shri Prasad,
You seem to be bent on "calling a spade a spade": but will the other immigrants from India or elsewhere to US agree? I very much doubt.
When I wrote that that only certain population segments do the lowly menial jobs in the US and these segments are discriminated in very subtle manner, Yamaka was quick to refute it citing Obama, Clinton and 'millions of other instances'.
So, I will be more interested in knowing how you respond to these'justifications' by people who intend to paint a glorious image of US even though they will agree that MLK did a phenomenal job for the African Americans. May be everything is hunky dory now, I don't know.
How do you view the fact that "Even in Football teams the black players and white players do not integrate."?
There is a saying in Malayalam, "enthum ceyyaam mahataam" meaning, people considered great can do anything (they have the licence for that). To me it looks as though it should be amended slightly to "enthum ceyyaam american saayippinum madaamaikkum". The opinions of Kunjuppu and Biswa seem to strengthen this view, imho.
Self-explanatory. I have given the past record of the tendency to justify the racism by some people in tbf and have also said that my views were not accepted.
30-11-2011, 01:32 PM
#7
sangom
Originally Posted by
happyhindu
Why is discrimination of other forms compared to discrimination in front of God?
It is so miserably shameful to think that a social empire of discrimination was created from "spiritual imperialism", and continues to stem from spiritual arrogance with a ridiculous attitude of "only me spiritual".
How can anyone oppress and suppress people using violence, or endorse such things, and then claim to be spiritual people with sattva gunas, i wonder..
Surely such people must be entered into the guinness book of world records, for no one before them or after them would ever think of creating or upholding such an abominable system.
Happy,
"Discrimination" in the ordinary and all-pervading sense means 'to distinguish', 'to separate', 'to treat differently on some basis', etc. As Shri Kunjuppu has said in post#3, are we not defined by our sense of discrimination in a 'meaning neutral' sense of the word? Further he adds that it is this 'discrimination' that makes us humans. He is therefore of the view that what Prasad demands, is unreasonable.
This opens to me an as yet unseen aspect of discrimination to me. Any 'egalitarian' society by the 'meaning neutral' sense of the term should have no discrimination and there must be complete equality of all people. But now it looks as though there is, strictly speaking, no true egalitarian society, despite some claims to that effect. And it becomes a simple question of "my discrimination is good and salutary, yours is bad and devilish". I find it difficult to endorse such a view. If one set of discrimination in the US (in Football teams the black players and white players do not integrate; there is strong enforcement of laws against discrimination based on race, color, gender, or disability in housing, jobs etc., which underscores the possibility of such discrimination happening in the absense of these laws and their strict enforcement) is creditable and praiseworthy, then why not another set of discrimination based on some other yardstick in some other place?
I feel Shri Senthil, Shri Suraju et al are right in their views, after all.
happyhindu,
prasad1 and
ozone like this.
After recording “like” for my above post, HH turns to criticize it, as below:-
30-11-2011, 05:17 PM
#8
happyhindu
Dear Sangom Sir,
Am disappointed to read your post. How can anyone compare racism in the US, and casteism in India.
Am often baffled where is the equivalence of comparison, between racism and casteism. And why do people quote racism / other forms of discrimination as though that somehow justifes casteism.
To me, casteism is the grand ancestor of racism, its a more dangerous beast than racism. It plays on the "religious mind" and breaks the very spirit of a man.
To inflict violence on a man, suppress him into slavery, categorise him as fit for only one birth, declare him not releasable from slavery, to deny him certain rituals, and allow him only certain stuff (to time and again show him he is not capable of anything more in the scheme of god-realisation), is comparable to racism???
Between apples and oranges, the only common thing is both are fruits and share some common nutrients. Similarly the only commonality between racism and casteism is violence and slavery. Apart from that i wud never draw an equivalence between both.
Racism is not enmeshed as part of rituals into a religion. Racism is an open enemy. It can be fought against. But casteism works its way thru "spiritualism" over generations, it works its way into a man's spirit, breaks it down and makes him beleive he is fit for only that much.
Frankly sir, i think casteism is a frankenstein monstor created and honed by the feudal laws of dharmashastras. If brahmins stood to gain from so-called 'middle-castes' during colonial period and vice-versa, then all that anti-brahmanism (and politics associated with it), would not have happened.
Maybe Time decided enuf is enuf. Maybe Kalki came and went, and cud do nothing. Maybe Bali came (as Indra), so did Savarni Manu; and both cud do nothing.
We are living way ahead in the technological world, i feel. So Time had to do something about it. And here we are.
If even now, some people continue to draw equivalence whereever possible, merely to somehow justify casteism, dunno what else to say. Hope they just take note, the future does not belong to them.
What i sense in the posts of prasad1 and suraju is not about lack of a true egalitarian society, its about somehow justifying casteism infact.
30-11-2011, 06:00 PM
#9
prasad1
Happy,
You do great injustice to me and my post. You either did not understand my post or chose to interpret it in your narrow view.
What i sense in the posts of prasad1 and suraju is not about lack of a true egalitarian society, its about somehow justifying casteism infact.
If you read my original post it very clearly says that birth based discrimination should be eliminated.
The discrimination outlawed by the country and some other birth based discrimination should be stopped.
By the way my post never mentioned caste, I suppose you need to see the true world, please remove your caste colored glasses.
30-11-2011, 06:17 PM
#10
prasad1
Sangom sir,
Any 'egalitarian' society by the 'meaning neutral' sense of the term should have no discrimination and there must be complete equality of all people. But now it looks as though there is, strictly speaking, no true egalitarian society, despite some claims to that effect.
You are absolutely right, to envisage a society without some discrimination is an Utopian dream, and even not desired.
For example we do want excellence in life and that itself is a discrimination. For instance discrimination based on intelligence, education, ingenuity, etc is desired in job environment.
Similarly personal discrimination in social life is not controlled by law, and condoned by law. I can discriminate as to who can be my friend, and is same is true for you.
By law certain forms of discrimination is illegal (depending on the location). There are other aberrant practices that should be outlawed, and we should work on it. For instance in US the Hispanic Americans are suspected of being illegal and discriminated, and that is wrong.
Last edited by prasad1; 30-11-2011 at 06:20 PM.
Here Prasad seems to take a stand in favour of working for outlawing aberrant practices although in the first para he seems to agree with kunjuppu’s views that discrimination cannot be completely eradicated.
I felt that Prasad was perhaps weighing his options here.
30-11-2011, 06:46 PM
#11
ozone
What i sense in the posts of prasad1 and suraju is not about lack of a true egalitarian society, its about somehow justifying casteism infact.
(Originally posted by HappyHindu)
Quite the contrary. Caste based discriminations have long been forgotten by the junta. They exists only for political reasons.
Infact they resurface only in verbose form if only to keep the more prevalent discriminations from being given a critical view.
To be continued...