Macaulay's Legacy - Desi Racism

temporal... total agreement that macaulay was king of all tools. he did a lot of damage, and one would be hard pressed to find a nice thing to say about the man. he was, as you say, an arch-racist.

but I look at the final word of your post, and I wonder when it becomes the time to stop pinning the problems of today on someone that made his statements in 1835. when do people become accountable for the here and now.

I do understand that there are legacies that remain after such a prolific invasion (and rape) of one's land, culture and psyche. I will not argue that. But eventually one (as a person and as a collective) must take back control and leave that aside. otherwise one remains a victim, correct?

so I found it rather ironic that in a review of Aditi's article where she wonders if the fight for independence has gone on a little too long, you took it full circle and put it back on macaulay.

Interesting article t. However, I got a bit confused about the discrimination of students from the "North," in Delhi. I guess most of us would consider Delhi itself to be part of the North. It was only when I followed the link that I figured out you meant the North-East, which makes sense.

SS, because Macauley's legacy lived on and lives on in our modern education system it's a little harder to root it out. It is so heavily institutionalized that it's hard to see where it ends and/or begins.

Besides if casteism still exists, millenia after it began, Macauleyism is just a blip on the continnuum.

Does the legacy of racism against African-Americans not live on in the institutionalized racism found in various police departments, notably the LAPD? That's just one example.

This not to say that these should be used as excuses. Perhaps it is so ingrained that unless and until someone sits down to analyze why people behave the way they do (before any real and positive changes can be made), we don't even know where these sentiments stem from, what their roots are.

jawahara... right. but with the case of African Americans, I wouldn't blame, say slavery at this point. I would start with the educational system that keeps AA students in cities in their situations by providing substandard education. Then onto the portrayal of AAs in the media. Then the skewed system which is like a gadgillion times more likely to imprison AAs for offenses than whites. To me the factors that we can change now are what matters.

if macaulay really does still impact the educational system here than something should be done about that. but if it is that institutionalized I would see that it is hard to root out, as you say.

still I think aditi's points about the generalizations made about white people are on point with what I tend to experience. there are some pretty bad assumptions made about americans on the whole along with the double standard that finds it permissible. I have also found that many desis think it is impossible for them to be racist. we've gone round about that one on DC many-a-time

Thank you for the review T...I am honored! :) Glad this topic is finally open for discussion on DC. Since I have made my own views pretty clear on the subject through my article I will hold back on commenting too much until of course one of the points in my article gets reasonably questioned. But for now I think I will see how the discussion progresses. This will be interesting.

smallsquirrel: thanks! :)

SS, I was talking about racism and did not not bring up slavery explicitly. However, even if we talk about racism, to me, it is clearly a legacy of slavery. One feeds into the other and it's not that easy to erradicate any such social reality without truly understanding its roots. And the roots go deep. The racism I have seen after living south of the Mason-Dixon line for many years is clearly rooted in the past, which includes slavery. The master-slave/superior-inferior relationship that was the core of slavery is at least part of the reason for racism against African-Americans today.

And desis are not the only ones who believe they cannot be racist. This is something that has been discussed for at least a decade and a half in even academic intercultural/social studies departments. The argument, of course, is that a person or a group without power (such as African Americans, for instance) cannot be racist against Caucasians, because racism implies a positive power equation.

I totally disagree with this premise but desis are by no means the first group to try this argument. Yes, a (relatively) powerless group perhaps cannot discriminate but it can be prejudiced and racist.

Just wanted to clarify.

ss:

so I found it rather ironic that in a review of Aditi's article where she wonders if the fight for independence has gone on a little too long, you took it full circle and put it back on macaulay.

am debating with myself between pleading the fifth or guilty as charged

;)

jay:

you are right ... should have said north east

:)

ss and j:

feel macaulay is just a latter 'blip' ... the root causes go farther down

can they be rooted out entirely? perhaps no

can they be put in perspective and attitudes changed some? probably with education and introspection and arriving at a consensus

temporal... :)

jawahara... but a powerless group can discriminate. discrimination is nothing but prejudice in action. OK, so it won't have a big impact, but anyone can discriminate!

also, yes I agree that slavery was the thing that started the issues with african americans in the US. but what I am saying is that because it was not the experience of either the AAs today or the people practicing racism against them, it is more useful to examine the views held today that keep them there. historical causes and relevance are very important. but to solve the issue, or at least begin to attack it, I believe the answer lies with much more modern concepts and challenges. so while in the deep south, where they do still live in the past in some pockets, looking at slavery is appropriate... but in the north where they have moved on, but have buried their racism and you have to look under the surface to find it... well, that's a different ball of wax.

Ss, discrimination involves most specificallly the with-holding of certain things (jobs, promotions,etc.) or disparate treatment (cops treating offenders differently based on race, for instance, DWB, for example) so I don't think a powerless group can really discriminate. A powerless person can be prejudiced, of course they can. But they do lack the power to give disparate treatment based on their prejudice. If they had the power they would discriminate but it stops at acute prejudice for them.

Ss, forgive me for being cynical, but I find the deeply hidden, institutionalized, hidden within code words, racism more frustrating and deceptive in the North, than the open good ole boy stuff in the South. The devil you know versus the one you don't. And just because the racism is hidden (they don't have klan rallies for instance) does not mean it doesn't exist or that its roots too are not tethered in slavery.

Yes, of course, the current status should be evaluated and definitely the reasons why these issues still exist should be examined to make progress. I totally agree with you there. But ignoring the impact of slavery on modern race relations in the U.S., or the Muslim kingdoms in India on communal relations in India (or casteism, untouchability, etc. etc.) is I believe one reason that these conditions continue as they do.

Just my two cents.

On a side note: Isn't it nice not to be responding to name calling and weird razorMirage comments on here...at least until now?

jawahara... we were saying the same thing about the north, I think. I just did not write it well. in the north people hide their true feelings under cover of political correctness and whatnot. that is not to say that all people there are racist at all, it is just that you cannot tell like you can in the south. people in the south who are racist will out with it right away, whereas in the north you could know someone 10 years and then BAM! you get in a fight and they call you a kike. (can you tell it's happened to me?)

Also, I think you misunderstood me because I certainly do not advocate ignoring the historical roots of any problem. They are essential to understanding the issue. My point is that the key to fixing it lies in the present. You cannot change the past, but you can try to change the now.

And just because people have a (sometimes) massive power disadvantage does not mean they cannot discriminate. Rarely is a group so downtrodden that they have no ability to make decisions at all, right? Once your perceived prejudice makes it into action, that is discrimination. Say you are a minority owned business and you refuse to do business with someone in the majority... that is discrimination, be it right or wrong. I certainly have more power than a poor rickshaw wallah here in bangalore, but when he takes me for a ride and cheats me out of money because he assumes I am a tourist instead of a regular shmo earning in rupees, that is discrimination. (of course he probably also cheats locals, too, so... not the best example)

Yes, African Americans are at a power disadvantage but you surely cannot say that it is impossible for them to discriminate against whites. Go to a place like DC which is a predominantly black city and watch what plays out! And they do actively discriminate against hispanics, because hispanics are lower on the power hierarchy then they are.

and LOL, I guess he got lost "pointing great points"!

ss:

My point is that the key to fixing it lies in the present.

true

you guys are on the same page...fixing the present does involve understanding if it is the elephant's trunk or legs we are fixing

digression:

during the civil war many slaves and black escaped to the GWN (great white north)...and many stayed back here ... Canada had and has a reputation for tolerance

but

until oh about 20 years back not a single jew was promoted as a Vice President in any one of the seven sisters (seven sisters are the seven major banks)... the unwritten rule was no jews, blacks, browns

ridiculous conclusion,if it not were for Old Mac you'd be communicating in sign language and throwing rocks in sea hoping to build bridges

kela:

heheh

how conveniently you gloss over the 16 major languages in india

and if the french and tipu were successful this riposte could have been conducted in any of those languages PLUS french

;)

well sir 16 different languages,thats what i meant,how many are you proficient in ?
besides there are places like the RSS shakas were you or ur kids can still go and learn about the virtues of gau-mutra and how gau gobar can save you from nuclear bombs :)

something tells me he doesn't get that the indo-iranian languages predate the germanic ones.

kela

i have a confession to make

i have trouble expressing myself in THIS one language...(i have this from the greatest authorities on my communicative skills - M and my kids)

i might slip into urdu/hindi when musing...but in order to communicate on one to one it will have to be this language

ab agar aap say yeh ummeed lagai baithay haiN keh hum aap say aur zabaanouN maiN bhee yehi baat dohraiN tou yeh hum say na ho sakhay ga

HEY! TRANSLATION PLEASE! :)

umm..what he means is that he's flat on ground and submitted to me

ab agar aap say yeh ummeed lagai baithay haiN keh hum aap say aur zabaanouN maiN bhee yehi baat dohraiN tou yeh hum say na ho sakhay ga

translation

now if you wish that i would repeat this in other languages then that is not happening

kela:

disappear where moon does not shine;)

T

What you say and quote is definitely true but it is also true that things are getting better over time. A country like ours with so much diversity, poverty, poor education quality, low literacy and very low internal migartion (until recently) is bound to have many of the problems that you mentioned.

I can give you an example.

X's parents always felt that Y community were clearly very cunning and needed to be avoided at all cost. This was for most of their lives. One fine day X married somebody from Y community. Today it is virtually impossible for X's parents to think negatively about Y community because clearly their daughter in law of 10 years is an absolute sweetheart.


The way I see it, things are getting better. As we further open up the economy and institutes of learning we are likely to see people interacting more often with each other and realising that many of their stupid beliefs are indeed stupid. At another level, providing basic education to folks who have never had any will definitely help in clearing up their minds.

All of us have different experiences, I think it is better not to stereotype all negatives into one national picture because that is not true.

The key point is are we learning? The answer I think is YES....


rgds

SS, about your example on discrimination in DC, I have two points:

1. Discrimination, the way that it is usually used refers to a systemic and systematic, and therefore, deeply entrenched system. So, yes an individual who is prejudiced can discriminate on an individual level perhaps but does not have the power to do so on any systemic level.

2. Also, since currently Hispanics are perceived to be societally lower, and more powerless than African-Americans, it is entirely possible for discrimination (not on an individual level) to occur because the power equation between those two groups is flipped, making the African-American group higher up on the totem pole.

Btw, I saw our friend rM talking about you in some other discussion here...now I forget which one.

Oh I saw it, I chose not to respond. He's not worth my time... always whining that people are against him and don't have a point. it's very tedious. also he thinks I am a man, so.... LOL.

also, jawahara... I would argue that there is an entrenched system in the African American community which does discriminate against whites. This is, of course, in direct response to the discrimination against them. But you see then why it is a never-ending cycle.

I have spent a good deal of time in the AA community in many roles. My ex of 8 years was AA, and I was extremely close to his family. I also was a mentor for AA inner-city students in washington DC. And I have a large number of AA friends.

Because they did not exactly see me as precisely white for whatever reason, I was made privy to a lot of genuine feelings and goings-on. AAs in the US are not a powerless group. They are a group that is being held down, and in some ways is damaging itself. But they have enormous economic buying power and they have control of a few industries in the US, especially within the urban music scene and all the things which surround it (promotion, clubs, etc.).

AAs in the US are some of the largest consumers of luxury items in the country, including high-end cars, homes, and jewelry. AAs have *made* certain jewelry designers what they are and have blacklisted others.

I do believe you are seriously underestimating the strength of the AA lobby and influence. While political influence might be lagging, they do have significant clout in other areas.

chandra:

The key point is are we learning? The answer I think is YES....

learning implies a conscious effort... am not sure if we are learning consciously or by default (as in the example XY example you gave)

the back drop to this discussion is adi's article...time to get back to it...

:)

Ss, there is definitely prejudice and even racist thought on a community basis. But discrimination on an institutionalized level (which relies on power structures) is missing among the AA community thus far. There is a difference between having discretionary income to blow on consumer items (money is green, with no other color) and having power in social institutions and society at large. I guess we'll just disagree on this point.

Really, I think the issue is too complex for an either or scenario. Race relations, not to mention prejdice, discrimination and racism are all loaded terms.

T

I am talking about the same article.

My point is many of us continue to ignore positive social changes. Your template of conscious change does not apply here. We are afterall a society that is still evolving,poor, lack of education etc.Many times change is a function of conditions around us- nuclear family for example.

As many people who called me x at college, there was a significant half who did not. My concern is not to stereotype all indians and instead focus on how some of the issues raised can be fixed. it is quite easy to complain and resort to debates, the bottom line is- what can we do to fix this?


rgds

Chandra: "My concern is not to stereotype all indians and instead focus on how some of the issues raised can be fixed. it is quite easy to complain and resort to debates, the bottom line is- what can we do to fix this?"

In my original article I do hint towards solutions. Some very simple and obvious solutions are listed: let me cite an example. Indian students arriving in the United States stick to the herd. Initially of course this is understandable but on a long term basis this does reflect in terms of interactions with other races. Indian students won't even just form their singular desi group...even within this group there are sub-groups based on regional sections. This doesn't just reflect behavior, it reflects tendency, inclination, an inherent preference for factions.

Therefore, I think one of the easiest solutions is to first admit that there is a problem.

In my article I make it a point to not brand Indians with these types of behaviors and continually use terms such as "...for a certain population of desis".

In the examples itself lie the solutions. The film industry, the matrimonial hunts, the daily conversations, the behavior of Indians living in the US...these need to change and what better way than to bring to their attention that what they are doing is not acceptable.

Most Indians in the US use labels like ABCD, kallu, gora, Chinki etc very casually and without associating any negative connotation with it. Nobody in a room full of desis cringes when someone starts their sentences with "Yeh Chinki log na aise hi hote hain..." or "In Gore logon ko na...".

The first step for any problem would be to first admit that it is wrong, that it is unacceptable.

With my article I wanted people to know that it is not an acceptable or ok thing to do and ennumerate the reasons why it can be viewed as "racism".

adi:

good post...and about time you surfaced;)

re this: Most Indians in the US use labels like ABCD, kallu, gora, Chinki etc very casually and without associating any negative connotation with it.

personally i do not consider ABCD or BBCDs derogatory...my kids are that and i do not mind this acronym...maybe because i do not read it as confused... instead i read un-chalakoo or less street smart as compared to the desi kids at home

also to me ABCDs are straight forward up front kids...if they smoke or drink they do not hide the fact...have a more open communication channel with parents as compared to desi kids

the rest of your post is on the dot

State must not discriminate one caste over another - and such discrimination should rightfully be banned. But that does not mean people can be banned from being part of their caste or social organizations. Freedom of association and assembly is important freedom - it can not be classified as discrimination. We look after only our own family and not somebody else's families - one can make an accusation that that is discriminatory towards other families but such discrimination has been perfectly acceptable freedom. Social freedoms are always enjoyed in small close-knit circles of like-minded people and people have right to include or exclude people whom they choose to socialize with. State can not force people to give up that freedom. In India, castes provide vital social support and social networking to families and people will not give them up easily in absence of any other viable system of support and networking. That is why castes have been found useful by people belonging to all religions and regions in India, notwithstanding the fashion among political elites to condemn and abuse castes at every turn. As long as economic, political, cultural and religious spheres are stripped away from caste system and reforms of last century have already achieved that to a large extent, caste system ceases to be a demon that is portrayed in political circles. What needs to be demonized is mobilization of castes for political power, which vests castes with political power, that subverts state's administration of individual rights in favor of group rights, that subverts government policy-making in favor of groups over people as a whole. Caste system should be reduced to socio-cultural organism, nothing more, nothing less. But politicians who have problem with even such minimal role for caste system have no problem empowering caste system with political power.

#31Kerty: In view of Kerty's above comment I thought I'd clarify a couple of points made in my article:

Kerty said: ""Freedom of association and assembly is important freedom - it can not be classified as discrimination"

Absolutely. This is very true.

In my article I refer to the "herd" phenomenon that quite a few Indians in the US maybe guilty of. When one reads it in the context of the article one can tell that it is more a criticism of the ideas and attitudes of Indians that surface when they associate selectively rather than the association itself. Meaning: Socializing with other desis in a foreign country is absolutely understandable and even necessary. What is disadvantageous is to use this familiar association to distance or isolate oneself from the rest of the surroundings and marginalize one's experiences in a foreign country where eventually through work, fun or everday life one will have to deal with the bigger melting pot of races. religions and backgrounds.

I have seen Indians making numerous fau-pax by casual references to the stated racial labels or stereotypes because they are so used to making them within their desi group. More importantly, desis within a group will get into a tussle over regional differences. I desrcibe a few experiences in my orginal article available at the link.

I personally think that it is moreso the balance between our desi associations and our social aptitude when it comes to people outside of this realm that determines our sensitivities and sensibilities towards people of other races, religions and even communities.

To further elucidate my point let me use an example: If people are racist towards us, we are inflammed and express incense at their ignorant behavior. I personally comment on their lack of exposure to diverse cultures. Well, same should apply to Indians. If I see a group of my fellow countrymen displaying blatant racism, I attribute it to their lack of exposure to people of other cultures. This is where the "sticking to one's herd" factor contributes.

Temporal: I think the term ABCD is used quite commonly and while most people have grown accustomed to it, I still think that the label of "confused" is slightly inappropriate when used to describe a group of first generation Americans who by virtue of their upbringing and enriching cultural experiences are a lot more together and culturally suave than a lot of the Indians back in India who for no apparent reason ape the West. What do we call those desi kids back home? We should probably call them Indian Born Confused Desis...but we don't!

Most of my cousins were born in the US and so I have trouble using the term casually. I know I will offend them. More importantly a recent experience changed the way I viewed these seemingly harmless labels. A fellow colleague was ruthlessly discriminated against by her Indian advisor who routinely berated her for being an "ABCD". The Indian advisor was in a position of power and hence I saw this colleague of mine go through hell and be treated unfairly amidst tags of being an overprivileged ABCD. I also found out during this time that it was not the first time an Indian had discriminated against an American born Indian. It changed the way I viewed the whole power equation in the US and the way I perceived these labels.

They are not just labels when there are people who take them literally and apply it when judging people. So the term ABCD may seem harmless until it is used against you.

adi:

now that you mention (re: colleague) i do recall about the travails of the poor abcd kid!

but also from what i recall in ALL those incidents her mentors, advisors and dept. heads were FOB indians AND their inherent insecurities vis-a-vis her!

my point: the discrimination originated from those indians ... and this also reinforces what you wrote in the article and in the post

the insecurities lie with us MORE ... us including those there and the first generation here

I relate to this article and the discussion.

I would like to chip in one more point which may seem outrageous to some indian folks reading this:

In my years so far in the US, i have never come across a Japanese woman wearing a Kimono or a Chinese woman wearing their traditional dress and wandering around in a super market; However i have come accross a lot of Indian women wearing saaris out here. I am not judging that behaviour; nor am I interested in doing that.

The conclusion that i draw from that is we resist change, and to most people caste is one thing that they actively resist to change. Would take a long time to go away :)

lakshmikath... but japanese women do not wear kimono in the streets of Japan, it is a dress reserved for highly traditional occasions. and basically chinese wear western wear in china, although sometimes they wear shirts that you will often see them wearing around also in the US... so actually your point is lost.

SS: I think i did not corroborate it with strong evidence, however you should know what i am talking about :). I have come accross a way lesser proportion of non indian immigrants tied to what they were back home compared to indian immigrants/visitors.. I think i kind of know why :)