India's Caste System Still an Obstacle to Modernization

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
It does not matter what you believe, but it is extremely naive of you to think that way. Do you think the world will be same as today when an average Indian consumes the same resources as an average American.

Well I think you're naive but saying so doesn't accomplish anything. Do you really think that as Indians get wealthier they're not going to want legal protections for their wealth? Legal protections entail documentation. I don't think India is different from the rest of the world. Absent global crises they will modernize and the vast majority of people will be documented and taxed workers.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Wow.. just wow. I agree that they united the nation.. and built railroads.. but do you realize that India was the richest region before Europeans invaded.

I think rocksteady is just overreacting to COW's hatred but can you link to evidence that India was the richest region before Europeans invaded? Maybe in terms of overall population but it seems unlikely on per capita or any other meaningful measure.
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
Absent global crises they will modernize and the vast majority of people will be documented and taxed workers.

Males who earn less than Rs. 160,000($3500) are not taxed and its Rs 190,000($4200) for females. There goes 80% of the population who cannot be taxed.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
Males who earn less than Rs. 160,000($3500) are not taxed and its Rs 190,000($4200) for females. There goes 80% of the population who cannot be taxed.

I'm not sure what your point is. My point is that as they get wealthier they will be taxed. It seems like you just want to find things to disagree with me on so that you can prove you're more familiar with India than I am.
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
It seems like you just want to find things to disagree with me on so that you can prove you're more familiar with India than I am.

I am not here to prove anything.. you just don't seem to understand that there is no use comparing the "modern" economies to that of India. As long as India is democratic, majority of the markets in India will be unorganized.

I am not ashamed to admit that I am no expert on India's past and present, but I can safely say that I am more familiar with India than you are.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
I am not here to prove anything.. but I can safely say that I am more familiar with India than you are.

LOL you're in denial man. That was obviously your whole reason for posting even though you start out by denying it.
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
LOL you're in denial man. That was obviously your whole reason for posting even though you start out by denying it.

LOL wut? I said your definition of modernity does not stick with respect to India's economy.. where is the denial in that?

You stated that I was disagreeing with you .. and yes I was.. on definition of modernity. I have no idea why you thought I was doing that to prove I am more familiar with India.
 
Last edited:

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
I think rocksteady is just overreacting to COW's hatred but can you link to evidence that India was the richest region before Europeans invaded? Maybe in terms of overall population but it seems unlikely on per capita or any other meaningful measure.

Both India and China were well-off in terms of economics before Europeans arrived. India and China both had individual GDPs higher than all of Europe combined.

http://www.economist.com/node/16834943
 
Last edited:

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
India and China both had individual GDPs higher than all of Europe combined.

http://www.economist.com/node/16834943

So if you guys are doing so good now why do you keep bringing up stuff from almost 100 years ago?

Every country dealt with genocide/slavery/colonialism/revolutions/massacres/famines in their pasts -giving and receiving.

It's 2011 now and the British Empire is gone. USSR is gone. Prussia is gone. Constantinople is Istanbul, nationalism as the scourge of Europe died in WW2 mostly with Fascism. Don't bitch at us Americans, we fought Europe and the very ideas you despise.

My advice is to get a hobby that does not involve obsessing over old shit noone is old enough to remember.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
So if you guys are doing so good now why do you keep bringing up stuff from almost 100 years ago? Every country dealt with genocide/slavery/colonialism/revolutions/massacres/famines in their pasts -giving and receiving.

You are missing the context..

The place was a shithole when they got there. They did their best to fix the place up.
The place = India
They = British Colonists
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
You are missing the context..

The place = India
They = British Colonists


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughals
The bulk of the people were poor. The standard of living of the poor was as low as, or somewhat higher than, the standard of living of the Indian poor under the British Raj; whatever benefits the British brought with canals and modern industry were neutralized by rising population growth, high taxes, and the collapse of traditional industry in the nineteenth century.


I see both sides point but this obviously has become a Nationalistic pride thing on both sides.

CoW is a judgmental ass but the UK colonialism was not worth arguing with him about. Both sides know it is undefendable from some kind of moral standpoint.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
So if you guys are doing so good now why do you keep bringing up stuff from almost 100 years ago?

Who is saying that they're doing so good now? That link is about how they were doing pretty well in the past.

Every country dealt with genocide/slavery/colonialism/revolutions/massacres/famines in their pasts -giving and receiving.

It's 2011 now and the British Empire is gone. USSR is gone. Prussia is gone. Constantinople is Istanbul, nationalism as the scourge of Europe died in WW2 mostly with Fascism. Don't bitch at us Americans, we fought Europe and the very ideas you despise.

These things didn't happen 1000 years ago. Also, many people seem to think that these genocides were a positive act.

My advice is to get a hobby that does not involve obsessing over old shit noone is old enough to remember.

There are things called history books.
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
I see both sides point but this obviously has become a Nationalistic pride thing on both sides.

Nationalistic pride does no one good..IMO, there are a lot of pretentious assholes who think their country/religion/caste is the best.

Trying to find reasons to hate on others.
 
Last edited:

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughals
The bulk of the people were poor. The standard of living of the poor was as low as, or somewhat higher than, the standard of living of the Indian poor under the British Raj; whatever benefits the British brought with canals and modern industry were neutralized by rising population growth, high taxes, and the collapse of traditional industry in the nineteenth century.


I see both sides point but this obviously has become a Nationalistic pride thing on both sides.

CoW is a judgmental ass but the UK colonialism was not worth arguing with him about. Both sides know it is undefendable from some kind of moral standpoint.

Hold on, let me go to Wikipedia and edit out that unsourced text you quoted.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Hold on, let me go to Wikipedia and edit out that unsourced text you quoted.

Good idea, delete a paragraph that backs up your argument 100%.

I thought the dude on youtube who stuck his balls in a vacuum cleaner was dumb that I saw today. You take the cake.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Who is saying that they're doing so good now? That link is about how they were doing pretty well in the past.

The economist link is data from:
Aug 16th 2010 -not 100 something ago.


These things didn't happen 1000 years ago.

Well CoW, they might as well have been 100,00 years ago, because you have NEVER given anyone a reason to be concerned with such old events. All you do is get highly emotional and accuse people of holocaust denial stuff. If you want to bring these things to peoples attentions then make a case instead of being dramatic about really old stuff that has no relevancy to anyones lives nowadays.

Why should I emotionally invest myself with old colonial problems that are so old they are way before anyone was born? Plenty of problems nowadays to worry about if worrying was my thing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Baasha

Golden Member
Jan 4, 2010
1,989
20
81
It's a shame India's still being held back by its primitive caste system. It's hard to imagine it will escape from its third world status if it clings on to outdated prejudices.

Perhaps you will empty that sawdust in your skull and learn to research something before pontificating on it as if you understood an iota of it.

First fact: you are an untouchable.

Second fact: independent India, that is, India after 1947, instituted many reforms that were in motion far before its independence into its constitution. Caste-based discrimination is outlawed yet people from all over India cling to their "castes" in order to benefit from the 'reservation system' which "reserves" seats (or places) in colleges and government jobs for the so-called 'lower castes'. This system, which makes the "affirmative action" look like a circus, is what has actually kept India economically in shambles. If it was a purely meritocratic system, as it was for thousands of years in India, India would be what India was; the "crown jewel" of the world and the richest nation on this planet (until the 1830s).

Caste based problems are dime a dozen in India because it is beneficial for politicians to use it as leverage to get elected; one caste is favored over another.

Western nations go to great lengths to hide their atrocities and have the temerity to talk down to Asian nations and especially India.

England has been robbing other countries in Asia and Africa for centuries and made themselves wealthy and now, after utterly destroying many Asian/African economies, cultures, and peoples, have the audacity to call them "poor".

The funny thing is, so-called "high" caste people are denied jobs, entrance to good schools simply based on their caste. That is why so many 'high' caste Indians emigrated to the US, UK, and Australia in the 1960s and 1970s. In a meritocratic society, Indians dominate. In fact, Indians are the richest and most educated minority in the US (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_minority).

You know nothing about caste and so it is better you don't comment on it. When you think you want to comment on it, just refer to the first fact I wrote here.

And, caste has nothing whatsoever to do with skin color or any superficial characteristics.
 

Baasha

Golden Member
Jan 4, 2010
1,989
20
81
I think rocksteady is just overreacting to COW's hatred but can you link to evidence that India was the richest region before Europeans invaded? Maybe in terms of overall population but it seems unlikely on per capita or any other meaningful measure.

Why on earth would that rapist murderer christopher columbus look for India then? The idiot lost his way (thankfully) and ended up starting one of the biggest genocides in the history of the world (native Americans).
 

Baasha

Golden Member
Jan 4, 2010
1,989
20
81
I was talking about India, not America. And when the war stated the UK was still the richest country in the world, so I don't know what this 'little runt' shit is.

The English killed hundreds of millions? Are you fucking nuts?

Caused poverty? LOL.

The place was a shithole when they got there. They did their best to fix the place up.

English were busy raping and murdering people from around the world and stealing their resources.. yet, India was the richest country on the planet.

Why else would England call India the "crown jewel" of the British Empire?

And, when your ancestors were murdering aborigines and swinging on trees, Indians were inventing the numeral and decimal systems along with a plethora of other things. So STFU.
 
Last edited:

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
Good idea, delete a paragraph that backs up your argument 100%.

I thought the dude on youtube who stuck his balls in a vacuum cleaner was dumb that I saw today. You take the cake.

The point of that post is to show you that you quoted an unsubstantiated, unsourced text. It's meaningless. I could go there and edit it to show something else. For all we know, you just quoted a 12-year-old in Bhutan.
 

Baasha

Golden Member
Jan 4, 2010
1,989
20
81
Modern = the economies of Japan, Western Europe and the US. The labor market is a huge part of an economy. An economy where 90% of the people have under-the-table jobs is not modern.

After being pillaged, raped, and robbed blind for almost 1300 years, first by barbaric Arab muslims, and then by worthless British & Portugese christians, India is growing at a phenomenal pace after just 63 years of independence. And, the first 43 years of those were simply stagnant.

The simple fact that the middle class of India is booming is proof enough that the economy is modernizing. Of course, for all 1.2 billion people to be considered "middle class", it will take decades and it will never be 100% middle class.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
22,249
6,439
136
Many of the people I argue with here are white supremacists or other far-right radicals. They get angry solely because of my presence.

White supremacists? Really? Where do I find their section and do I need a password to get in?