5 ms·

I appreciate these articles because it highlights how circumstances can change for a group of people at any moment. The old saying, "First they came for ... the

by Zaheer 6y ago

I appreciate these articles because it highlights how circumstances can change for a group of people at any moment. The old saying, "First they came for ... then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me" rings in my mind. It's important we highlight these struggles and do our part in supporting them... you might find yourself in a similar situation one day. With that I'd encourage folks to read more about BLM, Uighur concentration camps, Palestine, etc. Even if you feel powerless in stopping oppression the very least you could do is be aware and spread the word.

PradeetPatel 6y ago
I agree completely, as an Indian-American in the tech industry. I have experienced first hand discrimination against my technical and communication skills. One thing I have a lot of trouble grasping is that the Indian population is not represented in articles addressing discrimination against "Asians", despite being a part of Asia.
- mssundaram 6y ago
  Namaskar. I have found most Americans don't see India as part of Asia for whatever reason.
  - gwd 6y ago
    > I have found most Americans don't see India as part of Asia for whatever reason. East Asians have a very different culture than Indians; it doesn't really make any sense to lump them together. Dropping the "East" from "East Asian" is just being a bit lazy (because honestly, it is kind of clunky).
- nendroid 6y ago
  It's just a nomenclature thing. Genetically your people are more similar to people from Europe then the "asians" the article refers to. The article uses the word "asian" but technically the article is just referring to people who have certain facial features that are similar to people from China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam... etc. You are asian yes, but in terms of facial features you are in a very separate category than the previous countries I mentioned. I'm not sure what is the proper term here. I've seen the terms "mongoloid" and "oriental" used to refer to my people but I've also seen things written about how these terms are dated and considered to be insulting. I have found no other word to refer to "asians" the way the article refers to "asians." It's strange that it's so hard to find a term here as there is a very clear cut category here. Whatever... it's just words. I would respond to your query and say that "mongoloids" have a very different experience with racism in the US than Indian people due to a multitude of factors one of them being that most Indians already know English. Qualitatively speaking, in the software world Indians are easily dominating that arena over "mongoloids" so it's a completely different experience. Whatever hardships Indian people are going through would imho warrant a completely separate article to cover that topic.
  - Lio 6y ago
    I think you’ll find that’s strictly an American definition of “Asian”. In the UK “Asian” definitely includes people from the Indian sub-continent. See the BBC Asian Network for the example. Also your claims about genetic similarities and differences between races will need some supporting evidence as they sounds very much like personal opinion.
    - thaumasiotes 6y ago
      > I think you’ll find that’s strictly an American definition of “Asian”. Well, yes, American media are going to use the American definition of "Asian". This is an article on Vox, not the BBC. > In the UK “Asian” definitely includes people from the Indian sub-continent. It is my understanding that the UK term isn't more inclusive, it just refers to subcontinentals instead of orientals, since for historical reasons that's who's present in England. > Also your claims about genetic similarities and differences between races will need some supporting evidence as they sounds very much like personal opinion. Don't be ridiculous. Yes, Indians are much more closely related to whites than Asians are. You don't need to support basic well-known facts. Recall that Indians were usually "white" under US law (there are some exceptions) until pressure from Indian activists in the Nixon administration got them reclassified.
      - Lio 6y ago
        > Don't be ridiculous. Yes, Indians are much more closely related to whites than Asians are. You don't need to support basic well-known facts. Recall that Indians were usually "white" under US law... I’m sorry but that is not a “basic well-known fact” that is just conjecture. Dubious, now repealed, racial laws are not a sound basis on which to hang an argument. If you want to make that claim stick you’d need to do a peer reviewed comparison of DNA and prove it. If you really want to play this game consider that China and India share a border. Where do the people 20 miles on either side of that border fit in your racial hierarchy?
        thaumasiotes 6y ago
- john_moscow 6y ago
  If we keep focusing on identity instead of merit, everyone will feel discriminated and miserable. It's not like the "majority" vilified by the media is the army of clones. If you look closer, you'll see that someone is shy, someone else can't tolerate loud sounds, others get stage fright, or have a whiny voice, or an asymmetric face or whatever. It just used to be that people would focus on their strong sides, and find something useful they could bring to the table based on them, so others would respect them regardless of their weaknesses, and everyone was happy. But now we are celebrating the demise of merit, standardization of a human-hour billed at a minimum wage, and are spending most of our time fighting over who's a bigger victim.
luckylion 6y ago
> It's important we highlight these struggles Yay for the oppression olympics, whoever claims the most oppression the loudest gets attention. All you're incentivizing is increasing claims of oppression, not any improvement. Admitting any improvement would hurt the position.

by Zaheer 6y ago

PradeetPatel 6y ago

I agree completely, as an Indian-American in the tech industry. I have experienced first hand discrimination against my technical and communication skills. One thing I have a lot of trouble grasping is that the Indian population is not represented in articles addressing discrimination against "Asians", despite being a part of Asia.

mssundaram 6y ago
Namaskar. I have found most Americans don't see India as part of Asia for whatever reason.
- gwd 6y ago
  > I have found most Americans don't see India as part of Asia for whatever reason. East Asians have a very different culture than Indians; it doesn't really make any sense to lump them together. Dropping the "East" from "East Asian" is just being a bit lazy (because honestly, it is kind of clunky).
nendroid 6y ago
It's just a nomenclature thing. Genetically your people are more similar to people from Europe then the "asians" the article refers to. The article uses the word "asian" but technically the article is just referring to people who have certain facial features that are similar to people from China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam... etc. You are asian yes, but in terms of facial features you are in a very separate category than the previous countries I mentioned. I'm not sure what is the proper term here. I've seen the terms "mongoloid" and "oriental" used to refer to my people but I've also seen things written about how these terms are dated and considered to be insulting. I have found no other word to refer to "asians" the way the article refers to "asians." It's strange that it's so hard to find a term here as there is a very clear cut category here. Whatever... it's just words. I would respond to your query and say that "mongoloids" have a very different experience with racism in the US than Indian people due to a multitude of factors one of them being that most Indians already know English. Qualitatively speaking, in the software world Indians are easily dominating that arena over "mongoloids" so it's a completely different experience. Whatever hardships Indian people are going through would imho warrant a completely separate article to cover that topic.
- Lio 6y ago
  I think you’ll find that’s strictly an American definition of “Asian”. In the UK “Asian” definitely includes people from the Indian sub-continent. See the BBC Asian Network for the example. Also your claims about genetic similarities and differences between races will need some supporting evidence as they sounds very much like personal opinion.
  - thaumasiotes 6y ago
    > I think you’ll find that’s strictly an American definition of “Asian”. Well, yes, American media are going to use the American definition of "Asian". This is an article on Vox, not the BBC. > In the UK “Asian” definitely includes people from the Indian sub-continent. It is my understanding that the UK term isn't more inclusive, it just refers to subcontinentals instead of orientals, since for historical reasons that's who's present in England. > Also your claims about genetic similarities and differences between races will need some supporting evidence as they sounds very much like personal opinion. Don't be ridiculous. Yes, Indians are much more closely related to whites than Asians are. You don't need to support basic well-known facts. Recall that Indians were usually "white" under US law (there are some exceptions) until pressure from Indian activists in the Nixon administration got them reclassified.
    - Lio 6y ago
      > Don't be ridiculous. Yes, Indians are much more closely related to whites than Asians are. You don't need to support basic well-known facts. Recall that Indians were usually "white" under US law... I’m sorry but that is not a “basic well-known fact” that is just conjecture. Dubious, now repealed, racial laws are not a sound basis on which to hang an argument. If you want to make that claim stick you’d need to do a peer reviewed comparison of DNA and prove it. If you really want to play this game consider that China and India share a border. Where do the people 20 miles on either side of that border fit in your racial hierarchy?
      - thaumasiotes 6y ago
john_moscow 6y ago
If we keep focusing on identity instead of merit, everyone will feel discriminated and miserable. It's not like the "majority" vilified by the media is the army of clones. If you look closer, you'll see that someone is shy, someone else can't tolerate loud sounds, others get stage fright, or have a whiny voice, or an asymmetric face or whatever. It just used to be that people would focus on their strong sides, and find something useful they could bring to the table based on them, so others would respect them regardless of their weaknesses, and everyone was happy. But now we are celebrating the demise of merit, standardization of a human-hour billed at a minimum wage, and are spending most of our time fighting over who's a bigger victim.

luckylion 6y ago

> It's important we highlight these struggles Yay for the oppression olympics, whoever claims the most oppression the loudest gets attention. All you're incentivizing is increasing claims of oppression, not any improvement. Admitting any improvement would hurt the position.