Straight out of Euless, Texas (which it turns out borders DFW Airport and is kind of part of Dallas) comes this discouraging news video about alleged discrimination against South Asian Americans and Muslims:
A prominent national Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization today called on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to investigate allegations that a Texas apartment complex had a policy of refusing to rent to Muslims or segregating them in buildings away from other tenants.
The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called on HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity to determine whether StoneBridge at Bear Creek apartment complex in Euless, Texas, violated federal fair housing laws.
According to an investigative media report, former leasing agents for the complex say Muslims, whom managers referred to as “curry people,” were routinely refused apartments even when there were vacancies. The leasing agents said they were told by their supervisors that they could only rent to Muslims if they were all kept in two buildings of the 21-building complex. [Link]
The one thing that is obvious from the story is that when it comes to even talking about discriminations, Muslims, South Asians, Arabs, etc. are often all conflated. Any shade of brown with a “funny” name or associated with “smelly” food falls into the same category.
The folks at CAIR weren’t too surprised that this type of thing happens given some Gallup Center for Muslim Studies poll data from last month:
More than 4 in 10 Americans (43%) admit to feeling at least “a little” prejudice toward Muslims — more than twice the number who say the same about Christians (18%), Jews (15%) and Buddhists (14%). The findings are based on a new Gallup Center for Muslim Studies report, “Religious Perceptions in America: With an In-Depth Analysis of U.S. Attitudes Toward Muslims and Islam,” released Thursday. [Link]
That being said, if these allegations turn out to be true it is encouraging that these two women were willing to stand up and blow the whistle on such practices. As for the Curry smell, Pavani points me to a similar incident in California a few years ago.
In the note it showed onscreen, it said they required double the deposit if it was an Asian?? I have to echo the imam in this one.. "wow."
This would be pretty easy to investigate - get a list of residents and see if there's an "Asian bloc" in two units. Check the deposit history to see who was paying what.
Sigh.. I thought I was living in the 21st century, but maybe I was wrong.
First of all, this is not at all surprising to me. As an Indian-American, I've seen this, and now, I *EXPECT* this to be the case when I'm looking for apartments to rent. When I went to graduate school in a very Blue State, I vividly remember that the graduate residence halls were (1) furthest from the campus, (2) very expensive, (3) lowest standards of living, and (4) the supermajority were international students who were non-white. I'll never forget this.
Also, over the phone, I may sound like a ghori. Over the phone, I recently had one CPA-type who didn't realize that I'm a desi that "one thing good about this place is that there are no foreigners here." When I saw the apartment, however, he was polite, and since he didn't own it, was making an effort for me to rent it. I didn't rent this place, however, not because he came across as a xenophobe over the phone.
Overall, I truly believe that having an "exotic" name is a hindrance for someone to rent out their establishment to you. I tried reporting an incidence to 2 different housing agencies here in Boston back in '07, and because they made it so difficult to file a claim, I abandoned my efforts.
To me, the Housing Crisis is not an economic one, but a sociological one.
this sounds appalling, and obviously it's illegal. but i do think it's a bit rich to talk about *segregation* as opposed to *discrimination* people of various religions, races and ethnicities routinely seem to prefer to be with their own kind, or self-segregate for pragmatic reasons (ergo, muslim only public housing for retirees in the UK which caused controversy). this comes up with discrimination in indian housing in regards to non-vegetarians or non-hindus, and it happens in israel against non-jews and in parts of the muslim world against non-muslims. a post-black/white society, as the USA is now, i think our language needs to get a bit more subtle.
interesting no mention of blacks or latinos (the latter of whom are often "brown" too). the article says "asians," which in the USA usually means east asians.
I would not be surprised if it is true.
But this info is from CAIR and that alone makes it suspect in my eyes.
Who can forget institutional discrimination against Muslim names and non-vegetarians in Mumbai? That is far more appalling to me.
Isn't CAIR questionable?
Searching it brought articles like this with links to legal documents....
Cair tied to Hamas Taliban Al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood
http://www.examiner.com/x-27803-Trumbull-County-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m11d4-Cair-tied-to-Hamas-Taliban-AlQaeda-and-Muslim-Brotherhood
boston_mahesh wrote:
You sound like a Turkish warlord?
Dallas Islamic leader, former CAIR board member deported
http://dailycaller.com/2010/02/20/dallas-islamic-leader-former-cair-board-member-deported
Where do I begin with this one?
- South Asian Muslims AND Hindus, Christians, Jains and Buddhists cook curry.
- Arab Muslims don't cook curry and are some of the most halal and hygienic cooks on Earth. Ever seen a peninsular Arab clean fish with lemon and in the most sanitary conditions? It's a thing of beauty.
- Asians cook piquant food (like masalas, curries, fish, well-done mutton, beef, etc.) but what's the difference between that and a white person's apartment stinking of, say, cigarette smoke, barbeque, smoked chubs and stale beer?
- Some of Asian descent don't cook very much at all (*cough*me*cough*) and order out or eat "American" food.
- Are Gumbo and Jambalaya People included in this apartment complex's fatwa? Oh, wait, most Texans hate New Orleanians, too, because we're all poor, black welfare queens.
But, as a friend said, this isn't about logic or cultural enlightenment. It's about bigotry.
i think these guys deserve a drive by peanut hurling, courtesy of puli.... the puli has been getting angryer the last 2 days...I get spicy when i get angry.
CAIR Is a minor player in this story, guys. It sounds like the organization saw the story that was already under investigation in Texas and just brought it to the national spotlight. The tv story makes no mention of CAIR at all.
I have to say that I was feeling really proud of those two women who acted as whistleblowers. It makes me feel happy and hopeful that more people feel the way they do and will take a stand against incidents such as this. I wish I wasn't surprised, but I was and maybe someday I won't be.
For those questioning CAIR - you may want to question who is questioning them. Critics of CAIR usually come from the far right Islamphobic circles.The same people who still think Obama is a secret Muslim.
Right. This latest controversial CAIR "official" was deported by this current administration's Federal agents. You can't admit that perhaps CAIR is more of a problem to the Muslim community than a help.
I am waiting for the inevitable losertar, er I mean, libertarian to chime in that discrimination such as this should be perfectly legal.
Add non-Zoroastrians or non-Saraswat Brahmins to the list
As a practical matter, how does one get rid of the curry smell?
No. Not only right wing Islamophobes. See those lawsuit links by the first newspaper.
US Department of Justice taking them to court: TWO DEFENDANTS IN VIRGINIA JIHAD CASE PLEAD GUILTY TO WEAPONS CHARGES, WILL COOPERATE WITH ONGOING INVESTIGATION
"In his plea agreement, Royer admitted to aiding and abetting co-defendant Masoud Khan, Yong Ki Kwon, Muhammed Aatique, and Khwaja Mahmoud Hasan in gaining entry to a terrorist terrorist training camp in Pakistan operated by Lashkar-e-Taiba where they trained in the use of various weapons, including semi-automatic pistols. Royer also admitted to helping co-defendant Ibrahim Ahmed Al-Hamdi gain entry to the Lashkar-e-Taiba camp, where Al-Hamdi received training in the use of a rocket-propelled grenade in furtherance of a conspiracy to conduct military operations against India."
Anyway. CAIR is a side issue.
The discrimination there is naturally not right.
To #6: No, silly. I'm not a Turkish warlord. I'm a jive-turkey who wars against fraudulent lords.
By the way, the whistle-blower looks as if she's auditioning for her own reality TV show bid. Just my Rs.2.
Not cook Indian food or rarely cook Indian food. No other way that I know of.
You can try Yoga Fire's suggestion. But, sadly for agnostics like me, it does not apply
they want the curry but they don't want to smell like it..
eat puliogre and curd rice.
Even in Mumbai,some localities still muslims are not allowed. Even actor Imran Hashmi was denied a house and it was all over news a couple of years back.
Its unfortunate but that is truth.
get rid of the curry smell
curry smell, wth. I suppose just don't use curry leaves and if you don't like the Indian spices stay away from cooking it, and cook whatever smell you like. Oh and don't eat at Indian restaurants. Since i love the smell of curry leaves and I love the taste of a lot of indian foods, its not problem for me. I'm really wondering if sometimes people talk about a "curry" smell, to try and put down a group of people with anything they can find as a tool, as opposed to being actually bothered by it. There's plenty of other cuisines that have other smells (smells I don't particularly like) so cook those type of foods. sheez.
To keep your house, clothes, hair from smelling like Indian food get an outdoor gas stove and cook in your backyard or balcony.
Heh. I always associated lighting up incense with religion. Who knows. But I do dislike sometimes the smell of incense. I am strange like that.
Curry-smell was an an issue in a human rights complaint in BC some years ago. A resident of a retirement home in Kamloops, BC,, complained that the curry-smell from her indian neighbour and the Building Association demanded the Indian woman stop cooking curry.
.The actual BC Human Rights decision is worth reading -- really shows the merits of having these sort of less formal avenues for redress.
Razib -- segregation is discrimination when its involuntary and enforced by the dominant group.
Insofar as I am religious I'm not really one for ritual or orthodoxy, so the incense is mostly just a way to deodorize and create a smokey ambiance while playing jazz music without having to light up a cigarette.
There are a bunch of different types out there and a lot of them smell pretty foul, but how can anyone not like sandalwood?
i use a cinnamon air freshener
I'm an Indian landlord and I cringe everytime my Indian tenants move out. The oil vapor from deep frying and cookinghaldi literally sticks to wood kitchen cabinets and counters and is difficult to de-smell and clean. Some landlords have ripped out their cabinets and installed metal cabinets instead. Apartment walls are then washed with a solution of TSP, before painting and renting again. It's a pain in the ass, so I can sympathise with the cathedral ceiling issue.
straight up bigotry; a new and unfamiliar group rubbing up against another as it were. Italians and Irish had the same stinky food bias against them in the late 19th century in NYC and Boston when they were new immigrant groups.
as soon people are in close proximity, cooking smells are going to infringe. i lived around the block from a fish store that was also a fry shop, and my first friday in that apartment was ... horrible. then I closed the windows before I left for work friday a.m.
as to getting rid of the curry smell, my personal experience is that cigarette smoke trumps aerosolized jeera methi, so live with or marry a Mumbaikar and you won't notice it at all....
Curry-smell was an an issue in a human rights complaint in BC some years ago.
So bizarre. Curry is delicious. And kushbo-tastic
As a Bangladeshi-American, I am VERY offended by this story. I grew up in Tucson, Arizona, and NEVER heard of housing discrimination like this. But, being angry will NOT solve anything. We need to take action by educating our family, friends, neighbors, etc. about incidents like this. I think it's crucial to encourage kids/teens in our communities to become involved in careers that are out-of-the-box: lawyers, social workers, teachers, community organizers, etc. We need to watch out of each other.
straight up bigotry; a new and unfamiliar group rubbing up against another as it were. Italians and Irish had the same stinky food bias against them in the late 19th century in NYC and Boston when they were new immigrant groups.
I feel like that too. My mom mentioned there was one Kerala dish she wouldn't cook when we lived in apartments b/c it has a strong smell - it was with a type of fish they use...and it does have a strong smell, which I love, but I can understand why you don't cook that. Anybody smelled stinky tofu?...that's also very strong and probably wouldn't be good to cook. Some Gujarati food has a smell that is different to me and I don't like.
But seriously, there are so many smells that I associate with different groups of people, such as what some groups of people put in their hair, or the spice of lemongrass, that makes me retch. I don't know what the laws are, but there are a lot of groups that whether in their daily routine, or unhygiene, or in their cuisine that leaves an odor I find horrible, and so as a landlord you'll have to be pretty picky to find someone that doesn't have a smell you are used to. As long as the renter doesn't destry property or create filth that destroys the apt, than what room is there for someone not to rent b/c of a cooking smell? If I was an Indian landlord in the US, I would have to exclude certain groups of people, b/c of the potential, clean, but bad smell.
It's not discrimination. Discrimination is when Indian landlords don't rent to blacks or maybe Hispanics. Indian slumlords rent to everyone. By the way, Chinese landlords do the same thing. This is strictly a facilities issue. Have u been to an Indian restaurant and after getting back to work, your clothes are smelling of oil and spices? That's what happens in apartment kitchens with inadequate ventilation. Irish and Italians use herbs and not our kind of spices. That's the difference
You just don't get do you Rahul - I for one find many smells associated with other people retching. So I can argue that I won't rent to X group b/c they smell gross to me much of the time, and so it's not discrimination. There are some smells, when I go to friends' homes that I don't like and wouldn't want on me. I love my friends and respect people, so I can put up with it. But that doesn't mean it doesn't smell like high heaven to me.
And wtf are you talking about Indian landlords not renting to blacks.?...some Indians are racist, and guess what some blacks are racist too. Ever heard of whites and blacks being racist with each other - I see it and often in the workplace. I had a white classmate, who was a slumlandlord and guess who his clientele was - mostly low-income black people. In your comment you seem to be insinuating that Indians are the only group of people who can be racist and that's just not the case.
Discrimination is when Indian landlords don't rent to blacks or maybe Hispanics
lol, maybe their not renting to them b/c these Indians think they smell really bad. Could that be a valid excuse?
I can understand about the facilities issue. Heavy smokers' smoke will stain walls, and the smell will not come out of carpets necessitating replacement and repainting between tenants. I had a pressure cooker/dal mishap, with haldi infused vapor leaving a stain ruining the stucco ceiling above my stove-- which I will be painting over myself before I go.
If landlords can prohibit pets on the grounds of property damage, can they prohibit certain cooking techniques, being blind to the ethnicity of the cook?
Interesting and horrible.
I live in Texas...I'm not a muslim...but when I rented apts, muslim families were hands down THE best neighbors. Their children- perfectly behaved. No dogs, no blaring music, no drunken as*hole friends stumbling out of their apts causing problems. I think the only reason I escaped overt assery like this is because I was living w/my white BF at the time and they probably used positive discrimination: Gays have clean, stylish apartments!
Obviously, though, the problem isn't about muslims but about "brown" people w/funny accents, and possibly weird things they wear on their heads being perceived in a bigoted light and using Islam (and therefore any and everything wrong with the world) as a smokescreen. What's I genuinely don't understand is that I've never heard of a muslim committing terrorist acts in their own homes...seems like living right next door would be the safest place, but whatever.
Sue their collective nads off, I say. They have my complete support in the matter.
"Have u been to an Indian restaurant and after getting back to work, your clothes are smelling of oil and spices? That's what happens in apartment kitchens with inadequate ventilation. Irish and Italians use herbs and not our kind of spices. That's the difference.."
Or maybe the difference is how people keep their kitchens? We cook Indian food daily with turmeric, oil. etc. in our house and non-Indian guests are hardly overpowered and rendered senseless by weird, exotic scents when they enter the house. Non-Indian friends, unless they'r eating out of tins, have their own issues with their kitchens. I've been to several non-Indian restaurants and come home with funny smells in my clothing, especially awful meat smells. The smell of rare steak cooking is revolting to many people. In college there would be a persistent meat cooking smell in the hallways of residences with kitchens. Meat/fish smells are persistent as well. The smell of cooking organs, like liver dishes, is revolting. It all depends on what you're accustomed to and what you're sensitive to or what you find new/distasteful to you.
My personal theory is that it's the carpets. Smells tend to linger in the fibers and most sane people don't shampoo their carpets that often.
My house is all hardwood with tile in the kitchen and smells just don't stick around for very long.
"My personal theory is that it's the carpets."
Could be. I abhor wall-to-wall carpeting in any climate (although I understand why it would be popular in colder climates), and was amazed to find people who had it in their bathrooms!
It seems some of you are just getting worked up when this is just an issue of a landlord gettting fed up of stripping the apartment clean. Try owning and renting properties and see how difficult it can be. The worst Indian tenants to have are South Indians. They use mustard oil exclusively in cooking and that is the most difficult to clean off. Even Punjabis can't stand the smell of mustard oil. So my policy is that if a South Indian moves out, I try to rent to another South Indian. This way, I don't have to super clean and desanitize the place because the smell is comforting from one South Indian to another.
Rahul you make no sense and I believe you are not South Asian. So you don't like mustard seed oil. I don't like X,X, and X smells from someone's cooking or hair products. It's a stench that stays. I also don't like X, X, X b/c they usually don't wash properly. If I'm running a hotel and I don't allow X b/c he/she smells and most people from X group I've met smells, than that's okay b/c it's a problem to have to clean up and clean the odor of X and X. Also X, X, and X have a high propensity for crime and they "look" the part - I don't want to waste money that my apt or hotel room, will be rented out to a drug dealer who brings in prostitutes; it's all economical and convenience - hence I don't rent to X and X b/c stats and my experience show they are high on crime and also they leave a bad smell.
Sometimes it is sour grapes. When you can't put some people down b/c of facts you start with excuses. I've read so many histories of Jewish families in Europe and how they were always labeled stinky among other things. A lot of times these attitudes came about b/c the families were economical, and/or wealthy, and/or had kept to themselves with their own culture. You have only to read the experiences of the low-income tenant housing in present-day cities and also the experiences of immigrants in the early 1900s and their housing restrictions and stereotypes to understand this whole thing happens as a cycle. You have only to read attitdues of whites on blacks before housing discrimination was outlawed to hear the word, dirty, stinky, brings crime - so "it makes sense we don't want to rent to them".
Thank goodness for civil rights and fair housing laws - what you are doing Rahul, if you are not renting available apartments b/c of someone's ethnic background seems to be illegal. Oh, and yeah my family has commercial property they own as well as a house they regularly rent out.
Look PS, we own 30+ unit complexes in Silicon Valley. I don't need to bore you, but I'm citing actual experiences. Indians have their curry "smell". Vietnamese and Filipinos have their fermented fish sauce (nam pla/patis) smells while cooking their favorite dishes. I've actually had Vietnamese request apartments that didn't have curry smells. On the other side, I've had Indians refuse to move into apartments with fish sauce smells. Whites do their barbecuing on the patio, so the smell drifts out into the open air. After a while, it becomes tedious and expensive to scrub out entire apartments. As a landlord, what would you do? That right, move the Indians into Indian apartments and move the Vietnamese and Filipinos into their apartments. By the way, Filipinos and Vietnamese have very similar cuisines. So it's never been a problem between those two. It's only been a problem between South Indians and other Indians.
Just returned from a 2 week business trip to Bangalore and a 2 day vacation to Mysore. The discrimination against Indians (especially south Indians) is a lot more evident there. Bangalore and Mysore hotels are notorious for mistreating (neglecting) Indian customers. I was paying close to 100$ (4500 Rs.) per night and took me a good week to be acknowledged by the staff. A white, black or a Chinese customer would get the royal treatment the day he arrived.
In a Mysore restaurant attached to an expensive hotel, I waited for 45 mins. for a table and eventually went to an other restaurant.
But in their defense, I did not use the expensive hotel amenities like the foreigners did. I called the local cabs or even took autos rather than use the taxi services (at a much higher rate) provided by the hotel. I would walk over to a local bar (100 Rs..) rather than pay 250 Rs. for the beer.
Apartments do not rent to people with pets. Other objectionable odors could be also be grounds for not renting. This situation is unfortunately one where they have stretched the objection to cooking odors to discriminating against a group of people. Will have to see how this plays out.
And about CAIR ... based on on their long list of questionable characters in high positions, its like having NAMBLA coming forward to defend children against exploitation. Not someone whose help one would really want.
Rahul, generally mustard seeds are used & not mustard oil. For most part, ordinary vegetable/groundnut oil is used. So what is your excuse now?
I agree with abhi, it is better to not read the comments section.
In Bangalore, some of the apartments are not given for rent to singles. Single guys/gals bring lots of friends & make lots of noise is their reasoning
Awesome you don't live in Virginia.
By the way, I don't cook Indian nor look South Indian nor have a typically South Indian name.
Awesome bigotry by the way.
" I sound like a ghori"----- you sound like a mare?
try placing a small bowl of white vinegar by the stove if you're cooking with pungent spices--i don't know why but it seems to work. Can anyone explain?
Removing the headboard helps a bit
I suggest people call their number (817) 355-0055
identify themselves as a "curry person" and ask if there are any apartments available.
Akash. for your info, mustard seeds are dropped into hot oil hence making mustard oil. But then again, you probably will dispute that.
How to get rid of cooking smells? Use the vent and air fresheners (cinnamon work well) and clean your kitchen every single time you cook. Once every 4-6 months, clean all surfaces with 409 and Pine Sol.
I cook 4 days a week, mostly Indian, and use mustard oil once a week or so. The apartment still smells the same as when I moved in - musty 30-year-old building smell. I wish it smelled like "curry" as that would be an improvement.
I'd think the problem is less in India than in the US because houses are made of concrete and usually there's no carpet. Nothing really porous for the smells to get into that can't be washed. Most kitchens have windows or doors to the outside and high-end places I've seen have powerful vents. Also, people are more used to the cooking smell. Unpleasant smells are all relative. I had a friend from Thailand who couldn't stand the smell of cookies baking.
This is just discrimination, plain and simple. We have laws that say you can't deny someone housing based on their religion or national origin. If you allow people to smoke cigars in your apartments or have rabbits or ferrets, you can't certainly can't deny someone because of the food they cook.
Am I evil for hoping you get sued and/or face heavy fines?
------------ begin: counter argument --------------
great!
based on the comments, once again i find myself to be the lone libertarian in this group :-|
anyway, my quick 2 cents:
1. his property, his rules.
2. so it's ok for you to reject an apartment complex (for *any* reason), but not ok for the apartment complex to reject you?
3. please see #1
unless this is tax-payer funded "public" housing, no one has the "right" to any part of any private property. discrimination is something each and every one of us does at almost every given moment. your choosing one option over the other *is* discrimination and it comes from experience. every time you choose a city to live in, a school to send your kids to, friends you choose to associate with (and folks you choose *not* to mix with) - every single thing *is* discrimination and it's a good thing.
read and see if this will at least open your minds (if not change it): http://mises.org/story/3545
"The absence of discrimination between people would make it impossible to gain a conceptual understanding of man and would force us to operate at a purely perceptual level, either treating people as interchangeable blobs without differentiation, or treating each person as a completely new and exceptional phenomenon. It would put us in the position of starry-eyed infants who observe each new thing as a unique and unknown phenomenon to be stared at in vacant wonderment."
there is *absolutely* nothing wrong with (private-funded) discrimination.
and yes, i am an indian and if an apartment refuses me, i will go to one that will accept me.
-prash.
------------ end: counter argument --------------
ak, you're on point like a sniper with this one.
I'd like people to think just for a split second, if a housing complex was uncovered to have anti-black or anti-jewish discrimination policies, do you think messages on those forums would be of the sort:
"well you see when you baste fried chicken it does actually contain a pungent smell, because you do put a lot spice, and the way to reduce that would be to bla bla bla"
or
"I don't see why people are complaining, if I was a jewish person I'd just go to the non anti-semetic apartment complex that wanted me - besides its private ownership, they have the right to do what they please"
I would assume the FHA exists (and ak you can correct me, if you know) because housing is deemed as one of those basic necessities of life, and discrimination in that arena is simply not reflecting of a society that claims to practice freedom and equality. If something like this were to happen to either blacks or jews, sharpton and jackson would be at their door the next day, as would be the ADL or whoever else.
What does our community do? splinter and make the people who actually want to do something to correct the situation feel as if they're "going over the top" or "being fanatic"
shilip wrote:
Spot on, shilip.
We, as desis, seem to suffer from a "master-slave" mentality. If we perceive someone to be "above us" (whatever that may mean), we treat them like they own us. If we perceive someone to be "below us" (whatever that may mean), we don't even give them the time of day.
Obviously people have different levels of tolerance for smells, especially those which they aren't used to. Indians may not be bothered by Indian food, but very well could be by other peeps cooking meat (esp. vegetarians) and vice versa. That said, I don't see how the debate over cooking smells has anything to do with the story. The term "curry people" seemed to be a generic slur for Muslims, and little to do with cooking (hell they weren't even given a chance to start cooking before getting turned away). Most second generation desis still have "different" names and if we are to believe the women in the video, we'd get turned away as well, even if we cooked American daily. However, has anyone else thought that maybe the one woman knew she was going to get reassigned, and decided to concoct a discrimination story to a) get on TV and b) get sympathy points for her next job interview? So far these two women have been the only ones coming forward, and I don't see why we should automatically believe everything they say over the company's words.
"there is *absolutely* nothing wrong with (private-funded) discrimination.
and yes, i am an indian and if an apartment refuses me, i will go to one that will accept me.
-prash."
Prash, what if you end up in a place where NO apartment complex will accept you based on your background? If we let one apartment complex accept people based on racial/ethnic/religious discrimination, then what about taking your argument to the extreme? If you argue that it is OK for someone to discriminate because it is private property, then you are arguing it would be OK for ALL to discriminate. So let's say every apartment landlord decides they won't rent to South Asians. Even if there is a public housing option (and what is the quality of these housing options?) that would leave all the South Asians with either living all together in one (most likely low quality) public housing area (segregation?) with the people who can afford it trying to buy their own property. Now, say the people selling property decide they have the same right to decide who can or cannot buy their property... then all the South Asians in the area would basically be forced to live in one place in substandard housing.
In fact, that is exactly what happened in the Boston area to African-Americans. Even now- the neighborhoods in Boston are very segregated on the lines of race, but this has historic roots in redlining (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining) In Boston, redlining most often consisted of lending companies refusing to give African-Americans housing loans unless they lived they were buying land or homes in certain neighborhoods (such as Roxbury or Dorchester). These neighborhoods are the same ones which has less access to public transportation (to this day) poorly funded and run public schools, are are furthest and less convenient to the job hubs in Boston.
It is for these reasons that the Fair Housing Act exists, and also why it is so important to fight against stuff like this.
"That said, I don't see how the debate over cooking smells has anything to do with the story."
Exactly. I know a "curry person" who's of Indo-Guyanese descent and never wants to touch Indian food. but he'd be thought of as such by the management at this place.
"Exactly. I know a "curry person" who's of Indo-Guyanese descent and never wants to touch Indian food. but he'd be thought of as such by the management at this place."
Yes. The whole food thing is a moot point. I cook Indian food all the time. And it's delicious smell fills up my house.
Well I skipped most of the comments for being the clusterfucks of ridiculous opinion that they are, so apologies if this has already been voiced.
I've lived in Texas all of my life, and I'm in small town Texas now. Suburbs of Houston and Dallas have huge higher level education brown populations and these burbs do have latent racial tension. I grew up in a cookie cutter neighborhood of ALL brown/asian people but it was...a voluntary segregation? That to me seems to be the much more significant problem than apartment complexes restricting entry, its the grouping by race of middle class homeowners due to perceived "comfort amongst the same race". Or something. The solution to me isn't some analysis of how we can 'stop smelling like curry' (really, brown people? If you shower you probably don't smell. Okay? *hugs*) its opening the damn door (which incidentally would probably vent any actual curry smells) and getting to know your neighbors so you don't demonize each other. Wave. Talk to them. Explain where you're from and what religion you practice instead of sanctifying it beyond the realm of conversation. Have a sense of humor about yourself. Have a fourth of July tandoori BBQ.
You could see this article as depressing, but to me it seems to be one of the many symptoms of a community that doesn't understand each other. And this can be righted by talking to your neighbors.
This is why libertarians should be called "glibertarians." The statements are so condescendingly false and facile. First off, there is something wrong housing discrimination, whether privately or publicly funded. Congress said so. See here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Housing_Act.
Second, sure if a complex doesn't accept, you, personally, can probably find one that does. There are many, however, who can't. And for them, a private right action and a manner redress is necessary. Just because you got yours, screw everyone else, huh?
So let's all hold hands and sing kumbyah?
shilip - i'm not sure that it's just the value placed on a right to housing - under the civil rights acts, discrimination is prohibited in various other fora. on the other hand,i'm not too familiar with the detailed policy behind the civil rights act, but i think it goes more towards your other point of preventing discrimination in society, in general, and in these particular areas .
but be sure to stay away from their "comments for being the clusterfucks of ridiculous opinion that they are,""but to me it seems to be one of the many symptoms of a community that doesn't understand each other. And this can be righted by talking to your neighbors."
They won't be your neighbors if you are not allowed to live there.
Personally being a person of Indian origin, I never had problem in renting an apartment and/or house. Furthermore, we never had to do any "extra" cleaning of the rental property to remove curry smell or whatever. I always rented at the best location of the town. In the USA if you have money, you can get anything regardless of your color, race and gender.
Yes... To rephrase without snark, I think purposeful housing restriction is much less widespread than more subtle housing discrimination and neighborhood racial discord. From my experience, there exists a voluntary segregation that goes both ways. Simple gestures can help cure social ills profoundly because racist actions are fears manifested. In this case just must be served.
I stress community because there is no unified community in modern suburbs even if they are diverse, and also because you don't call desis "curry people" if you're actually friends with them.
Can you say it again with "snark" this time because I read that couple of times and I honestly don't know what you are saying. It's almost like it's a "clusterfuck of ridiculous opinion."
"I stress community because there is no unified community in modern suburbs even if they are diverse, and also because you don't call desis "curry people" if you're actually friends with them."
but being friends with them is (and should not be) not a pre-requisite for allowing them to live where they please (and can financially afford to)
Covert discrimination cannot and should not be countered by legal action. In a free country, private individuals have a right to choose who they rent out apartments to. In this case they may have a racial bias, but I see no reason why the government has the right to tell them who they must rent to.
I would prefer if discrimination is countered through education, rather than legislation. If my neighbor is racist, it is his right to be so. If I want to change that, I should demonstrate to him the error of his ways through rational discourse, not sue the hell out of him (which only exacerbates the problem, pushing it underground).
Here's an example of why this right (of the owner to choose who to rent to) must not be infringed by the state. Let us say I own a four apartment complex, which currently has three minority families and one vacant apartment. Then, a neo-Nazi fellow comes to me and submits an application to rent. The guy is educated, does not have a criminal record, and is nice enough by first appearances. However, I find out that he is a member of the white nationalist party.
Under these circumstances, it is of paramount importance that I be able to discriminate against him on the basis of his political allegiance (even though this may be considered against "equal opportunity" laws). The state cannot take my right to discriminate away, no matter how noble its goals seem.
In fairness to prash, I think he is arguing not from the point of view of existing laws, but from an exclusively property-rights based libertarian point of view (I think his argument would be that things like the FHA and other civil rights protections actually distort the market, and that pure market based approaches will ensure that folks get a desirable outcome. For example, if Indians are indeed being discriminated against, a market in housing for Indians will appear, and so on). There are others who argue from a limited government power perspective, again arguing that this is a problem that can be solved by markets.
While there is some appeal to such a line of thought, the issue is that such discrimination is often not self-remedying and cannot be fixed by markets. I'd recommend that prash (and psamtani) read the work of the Nobel winning economist, Gary Becker, who is no shrinking liberal, and a strong advocate of markets. One of his models for discrimination very clearly talks about how for minorities that are a small proportion of the population (say, less than 10%), the cost of discrimination is borne disproportionately by the minorities (and hence the majority does not have any incentive to fix it). Similarly, he describes mathematically about how discrimination in certain areas (for example, by teachers and employers) can be self fulling. Housing is similar - lack of affordable housing can significantly affect employment prospects etc., and hence can lead to cascading effects on the discriminated population. This is what motivates some kind of government role in these scenarios.
In any case, the most offensive aspect of this particular discrimination is its war on English. Haven't the landlords heard of the entire concept of currying favor?
At some point, if there is a role for the government, it should be in providing a public housing option for these guys, not forcing private owners to rent to them. And it needs to be a repeated problem for this to happen. Most people don't want to live around people who don't want them around. If you silence their voices, how do I know which apartments to avoid??
This is a tree falling in the forest argument. If you silence their voices, just like if there is a person who is a closet neo-nazi but doesn't organize or distribute leaflets in the complex, I am not sure what problem he causes.
Reading these libertarian arguments makes me so glad that most find their views completely discredited and that they are so far from the levers of power.
What is the ideal state of nature for these people? The US South in 1875-1960s? Discrimination was legal and widely practiced and the market did not correct the problem. Shops, businesses and public accommodations did quite well despite overtly discriminating against over 10% of their market.
"Under these circumstances, it is of paramount importance that I be able to discriminate against him on the basis of his political allegiance (even though this may be considered against "equal opportunity" laws). The state cannot take my right to discriminate away, no matter how noble its goals seem."
actually no, you shouldn't be able to discriminate against him based on his beliefs and views, you can based on safety concerns for the remaining residents.
I am not libertarian, but this argument doesn't really fly because the state played an active role in creating laws and a social system that perpetuated segregation and discrimination - for example, mandating segregated workplaces and schools, preventing blacks from registering as voters and thereby limiting their influence on the political process, and so on. This, and other such laws, is what Jim Crow refers to. It is episodes like this that libertarians actually use to support their argument for a limited government restricted to providing security and enforcing laws, and leaving the rest to private enterprise.
Further, since it doesn't seem like you really read my comment, there are certain aspects of society like education, employment (and likely, housing), where discrimination has a feed-forward effect, and hence discrimination in those arenas further exacerbates general discrimination against minorities.
These Randian statements are really nice and forceful sounding, but you are shaking your impotent fist here.
The state can and does take away that right, and gives those discriminated against a remedy against you if you do discriminate. That genie is out of the bottle and not going back in. In case you haven't noticed, the trend is to expand the categories of people who fall under anti-discrimination laws (e.g., gays and lesbians) rather than limit them.
"Personally being a person of Indian origin, I never had problem in renting an apartment and/or house. Furthermore, we never had to do any "extra" cleaning of the rental property to remove curry smell or whatever. I always rented at the best location of the town. In the USA if you have money, you can get anything regardless of your color, race and gender."
I think the majority of Indians in the US have this same experience. But like most of the desis on here have voiced, that doesn't mean everyone has this experience, and some people won't have the resources to move around to find a nondiscriminating landlord, and its important to recognize discrimination and call attention to discrimination. I'm glad a complaint is filed against that apt building and noise is being made. I'm not a lawyer but it seems a pretty blatant violation of Fair housing laws. Seriously I am Indian and hardly ever cook curry (though I hope to continue to learn - when I cook my Indian dinners, that's when I get the best reception from my guests who I have over) yet rahul would be discriminating against me. My Filipino friend rarely cooks filipino cuisine and ends up cooking Hungarian cuisine as that is where her husband is from.
I have often heard from white people, don't hire blacks or rent to them. As we also own motels and hotels, that same crap was heard by us by the white peole who worked for us. I do believe that people like little rahul, may not be Indian and is just complaining to start a stigma. The bottomline is that people like rahul cannot be discriminating against people b/c of their ethnicity, whether they are black, white, filipino, indian, etc. Everyone will find some odor that culturally derives from others disgusting, however that's not going to be reason enuff to discriminate. If rahul will just say which business he owns - it would be good for the city to know this practice is going on, in his business.
"Personally being a person of Indian origin, I never had problem in renting an apartment and/or house. Furthermore, we never had to do any "extra" cleaning of the rental property to remove curry smell or whatever. I always rented at the best location of the town. In the USA if you have money, you can get anything regardless of your color, race and gender."
Total joke if I ever heard one.
First of all how would you know if you were redlined, or denied based on your color? Do you think these people will tell you? "Oh yes mr so and so, we actually have apartments available, but you're not white so we cannot rent to you, I hope you understand"
I think you're one of these cats that grew up not in the US, and have not had to experience these kind of racial differences, or treatment based on race through your formative years.
-Oprah had all the money in the world, but she was not let into a jewelry store once, in Chicago (her own town none the less) because the staff did not recognize her (she wore no makeup or nice clothes) and thought she was just some ol' black woman.
Shilip,
I was born, brought up and stuided in India and came to the USA on work visa and became permanent resident thought employer sponsorship. I am dark, look Indian and speak with a typical Indian accent. Despite all that, not even a single time I was denied on any application for renting an apartment or house. I rented in suburbs of big cities as well as very small town of the USA. The owners of all retnal places were either white or companies. Because I was never deined on rental apartment, I have no reason to believe that there is discrimination on rental properties.
It may sound like a joke but that is my personal expereince.
With regard to my comment about money, my experience says if a person of any color/race shows money when he/she enters the shop, he/she will be happily received. Keep in mind, white people of the USA and Europe are happily selling whatever they can to Indians/Chinese or for that matter whosoever has money.....Money talks these days.
PS,
I agree with you. I have something to add to your comments. If you say majority of Indians (or non whites) have similar experience like me, I think that is reasonable statement. US government (for that matter other states) can make laws to eradicate discrimination completely and create awareness about diffrent colors, cultures and races however there will be some a small percentage of people who will continue to be biased based on color/race/gender. This could just be due to their personal expereince, lack of education or could just be the human factor. I think if we continue to highlight the benefit of treating everyone equal we stand better chances.
While I'm totally against such discrimination, I'd like to add couple of things I have observed:
It is indeed true that most Indian apartments and cars smell of curry, and if you have noticed, during lunchtime (and even after the lunch hour) the cubicles of your desi co-workers smell of food - more often than not. Please don't get me wrong, I love Indian food and I'm an Indian myself who loves to make own dinner at home. But that doesn't mean I want my cloths and everything having that smell 24/7.
If it helps at all -
1. You can open up all your windows and run the exhaust during the cooking process, and it does help to continue the same couple of hours after cooking is done
2. You can use odor-remover sprays in open spaces once you feel it's time to close the windows and switch off the exhaust
3. I don't use curry leaves or raw onion for cooking. I do with the onion flakes and chopped garlic which I tend to add a bit later instead of frying them at the start. Oh, I don't fry the spices either - I add them a bit later. This might have helped me get rid of the smell faster too. But again, this sort of cooking process may not be for everyone.
"Despite all that, not even a single time I was denied on any application for renting an apartment or house. I rented in suburbs of big cities as well as very small town of the USA. The owners of all retnal places were either white or companies. Because I was never deined on rental apartment, I have no reason to believe that there is discrimination on rental properties.
It may sound like a joke but that is my personal expereince."
What Im telling you is, if it did happen to you , you'd never know it, because America has changed such that people can no longer freely advertise discriminatory practices.
So I find it hilarious when people come out and bold and underline their messages "I have never been a victim of a ..." as if these people will specifically delineate to you when you are. Don't you understand that the muslims/'curry people' denied housing on this complex would walk away from that place thinking "Ive never been discriminated ever in my life! America is a great wonderful land where the lillies bloom and fireflies dance!"
"I was born, brought up and stuided in India and came to the USA on work visa and became permanent resident thought employer sponsorship."
Which explains your naivete on this issue. All of my relatives who've come here well into their adult years don't have the experience of a racism-laden childhood. You keep sayin "this is my experience" well what your experience lacks is witnessing preferential treatment as a 5 year old right in front of your eyes, and being confused as hell when all you hear around you is "America is the land of freedom, where color holds no barrier"
So take a step back, this is something you're likely more confused about than you think.
Shilip,
Most first generation Indian migrants (like me) feel that Indians who grew up here integrate with othe cultures better and face less discrimination because they can speak English in Amerian accent, mannerism are refined (American style) and can talk on local American issues. But you seem to imply otherwise. This discussion thread is specifically for rental apartment and not about discrimination in school or at work place.
WIth regard to your comment:- "Ive never been discriminated ever in my life! America is a great wonderful land where the lillies bloom and fireflies dance!", try living in another country like the UK, Australia, NZ or any European country or for that matter great India. In India, we are taught "Unity in Diversity" from grade 1, however we alll know the status of unity and discimination based on relgion, language, economic status and also on color. Light skinned Indians get better treatment even today.
A: I am not sure if you are being comical, but in case you are serious, please disabuse yourself of this preposterous notion that there is no discrimination against Indians/other minorities in renting apartments.
If you have time and care to explore this issue further, then run an experiment. In one of your earlier comments, you stated that you have a 'typical' Indian accent. Get someone over with a standard American accent. Pick up one of those common rental books and start calling up the rental places one by one which are located in areas where the minority populations are low in number and are not around universities. The places where they tell you that the units are not immediately available for some reason, get the other person (with the American accent) to call up the same places after 15 minutes asking to rent. If you run this experiment enough number of times, you will clearly see a pattern. If you were to only call up rental units which are owned by big corporations, it might take more than a few tries to see the difference, but once you start calling up individual renters, your American dream will come crashing faster than you can imagine.
Or you can just google 'housing discrimination' and get educated.
Btw, you may very well be correct when you say that there is less discrimination in the US when compared to Australia, NZ, or Europe but 'less' discrimination does not translate to 'no' discrimination.
Your comments are very illustrative of a tendency I have sometimes seen in desi people where no discrimination takes place anywhere in the United States unless you have been personally subjected to it. For example, if you have never been discriminated at work, then there is no workplace discrimination, etc. etc.
In Jury Trials for Civil Rights cases, you are the undetectable B-2 which will nuke the plaintiff's case as the Plaintiff's attorney keeps you on the jury thinking that you 'will get it'.
"feel that Indians who grew up here integrate with othe cultures better and face less discrimination because they can speak English in Amerian accent, "
And that would be a false statement, because someone bent on discriminating against you doesn't care what your accent sounds like.
"In India, we are taught "Unity in Diversity" from grade 1, however we alll know the status of unity and discimination based on relgion, language, economic status and also on color. Light skinned Indians get better treatment even today."
Does India have a history of dark skinned Indians not getting housing, jobs, and facing harsher penalties in the criminal justice system? Colorism within a community while it's a form of discrimination, cannot be equated to systematized exclusion. As a dark skinned Indian growing up in India, were you ever made to feel like you weren't Indian? That you were a foreign element?
Indians raised in America are/were made to feel that all the time. A systematic, institutionalized practice of exclusion is far different than thinking light skinned people are "prettier" (which I agree is a form of discrimination)
"Does India have a history of dark skinned Indians not getting housing, jobs, and facing harsher penalties in the criminal justice system? Colorism within a community while it's a form of discrimination, cannot be equated to systematized exclusion. As a dark skinned Indian growing up in India, were you ever made to feel like you weren't Indian? That you were a foreign element? "
I think that it is hard to talk about this because it brings in other issues. If I look at North India-- darker skinned people also tend (note: tend, not always) to be lower caste, and also lower class. A lot of people then get three-fold discrimination- caste, class, and skin color.
There is definitely a history of dark skinned Indians not getting housing, jobs, and facing harsher penalties. It may not be so starkly obvious among well-educated people in the cities, but go to the slums and see how lives in substandard housing. See who gets held in jail for crimes, and who walks free. See who the police beat in the street. See who lives in certain neighborhoods and who is not allowed.
Bihar is of course, an extreme of this, but this state shows most starkly the discrimination. For generations landlords (upper caste, upper class, lighter skinned people) were in charge of naming the children of the lower caste, lower class, darker skinned of their serfs (I think that is the best description). They would name then things like "Blackie" or "Monkey" and so forth. Landlords in Bihar still can rape and use women (and children) from the lower group with no recourse.Out of my 25 students, the students with the darkest skin were embarrassed to have their pictures taken because they felt they were dark, and hence ugly. They had lower self-esteem then the even slightly lighter skinned students. Lower caste/class/darker skinned people in Bihar were not allowed to sit in chairs, they had to sit on the ground while higher up people could sit in chairs. I am not talking about ancient times, but 2005. Dark skinned, lower class, lower caste people in Bihar did not worry about whether the higher up people treated them as members of the nation-- their demand was to be treated as human beings.
"A: I am not sure if you are being comical, but in case you are serious, please disabuse yourself of this preposterous notion that there is no discrimination against Indians/other minorities in renting apartments."
I don't think that is AT ALL what A is saying. he is saying he himself has not seemed to face housing discrimination. And yes, "seemed" is the verbed b/c no one can know for sure in many situations if they are being discriminated at. I don't go around with a chip on my shoulder calling "racism" everytime there's some conflict. That cheapens what actually is racism and it's hard to prove in personal situations.
A - I completely agree with you that many Indians won't have to deal with housing discrimination. Shilip's own experiences are hers. Yours are yours. I don't think when I am told there isn't an aptmt available that that means I'm discriminated against; I realize such things exist but no I didn't live in such racialized world as Shilip seems to have lived in the US. the comedian Aziz Anzari, havng grown up in the South like me, with a gastroentologist dad, has said that race wasn't an issue for him. That's how it was for me in many respects. I had teachers in my small southern town say all the time how smart I was, treat me as the teacher's pet, and I never grew up feeling alientated or unattractive b/c of my race.
A, the other thing, Indians sometimes have positive stereotypes. How many times have I heard "indians are so smart" - there are positive and negative stereotypes that are often part of life particularly for a minority. These positive stereotypes can hinder the discrimination that someone who feels that way, can have against a foreign minority; much more so than other minorities who didn't have the immigration history like most desis, and are not in a high socioeconomic bracket, and therefore often don't have the positive stereotypes, and partially b/c of cycles of poverty have statistics that also support high crime, etc.
A, i don't believe you are saying that discrimination against desis don't exist - of course not. However I completely agree with you that many Indians may not experience it in a blatant way that effects their lives detrimentally.
"Shilip's own experiences are hers. Yours are yours. I don't think when I am told there isn't an aptmt available that that means I'm discriminated against; I realize such things exist but no I didn't live in such racialized world as Shilip seems to have lived in the US. the comedian Aziz Anzari, havng grown up in the South like me, with a gastroentologist dad, has said that race wasn't an issue for him."
I'm a guy.
And I don't deny A's experience. I'm just saying they are incomplete. I know many Indians who came to the US after their mid 20s who share similar views. As for Aziz Ansari and others that say "race is not an issue," all that means is he's not 'tuned' to it. But if he grew up in the US, south or not, race certainly was an issue. It's just a matter of how much he was/is aware of it.
"How many times have I heard "indians are so smart" - there are positive and negative stereotypes that are often part of life particularly for a minority."
These 'positive' ones are actually negative in disguise. and it takes a bit analysis to discover it. It's pejorative, usually people who say this are one's who are in authority, and who make decisions about the lives of these particular minorities, (teachers, bosses, etc...)
like when bill gates said "chinese are the smartest people in the world, south indians are next" of course, white males, who make most of the decisions that affect these people can stand outside and create the heirarchy in the first place.
"These 'positive' ones are actually negative in disguise. and it takes a bit analysis to discover it. It's pejorative, usually people who say this are one's who are in authority, and who make decisions about the lives of these particular minorities, (teachers, bosses, etc...)"
I totlly agree with you. Stereotypes in general are destructive. It doesn't allow minorities to be indiividuals - takes away our humanity. I volunteer with an Asian domestic violence organization, and certainly our training involves the destructiveness of model minority myth. Yet, at the same time, in practical life, these positive stereotypes, may shield you from say some of the housing discrimination that may be prevalent if you weren't a minority with some positive stereotypes or you weren't from a high-income profession, etc.
Incidents like what is written about in this blog entry, makes you wake up from "complacency" that might, might, be cause by affluent soceioeconomic conditions where you are the boss of folks who are in the majority. Anyone can face discrimination. Laws like the fair housing act are supposed to counter that - hopefully with this incident those discriminating assholes will have to answer for it.
"bill gates said "chinese are the smartest people in the world, south indians are next" of course, white males, who make most of the decisions that affect these people can stand outside and create the heirarchy in the first place."
bill gates said that? everybody knows that south indians are the smartest, bestest folks in the whole world ;). God, how ridiculous of gates.
"And I don't deny A's experience. I'm just saying they are incomplete."
Isn't everyone's experience "incomplete" in the grand scheme of things?
"Isn't everyone's experience "incomplete" in the grand scheme of things?"
Again, nice attempt to obfuscate and misdirect.
The discussion at hand is not "the grand scheme," rather a particular one pertaining to discriminatory experiences in the United States, including, but not limited to housing.
Me saying I have access to certain experiences, that others do not, doesn't imply the reverse isn't true, in a different context.
I'm not trying to misdirect. My point is your are arguing against A because they said that is not their experience. Your response was to tell them they must not be "atuned" to racism, which makes it sound like A is dumb and oblivious. My point is that A's experience might be incomplete from your experience-- but yours may also be from theirs. Maybe the two of you have just experienced two different extremes-- isn't is possible that A is smart enough to know what discrimination is, and did actually not experience it, as they said?
Pagal_Aadmi,
I rented an apartment where I was the only non white in the town and it was the first application I filled. I did not bother to figure out if there was short supply of apartments. It was a private white owner. I was very apprehensive when I relocated to that town but was my expereince was not bad in renting though checkout girls could not understand my accent.
Shilp,
On the other hand, I was denied a rental apartment in Chennai because I am a North Indian and did not speak Tamil. My skin is not very light but it is not very dark either but I grew up listening that fair skin is better and I should look for fair skin girl to marry.
Pagal, Shilip and all
I am not saying there is no discrimination in the USA but I don't see any harm in sharing positive personal expereince. Also I don't see anything wrong in comparing the USA wiht other countries because it is all relative. Here you can run a website and claim there is discrimination but in some parts of world if you run such a website, you may be behind bars within days.
All I am saying is, let us appreciate the positives we have while we all continue to learn to be unbiased and continue to attempt to bring discrimination to zero.
PS
We seem to think alike. Thanks
Linzi wrote:
Please note that the feudal system in many parts of North India was put in place during the Mughal Period.
It is not a remnant from ancient times.
i can totally see a hollywood movie based on her experience, a little bit like erin brokavich. america loves the stand-up-for-what's-right underdog-against-the-fatcat-establishment protagonist. plus she's photogenic.
"I'm not trying to misdirect. My point is your are arguing against A because they said that is not their experience. Your response was to tell them they must not be "atuned" to racism, which makes it sound like A is dumb and oblivious. My point is that A's experience might be incomplete from your experience-- but yours may also be from theirs. Maybe the two of you have just experienced two different extremes-- isn't is possible that A is smart enough to know what discrimination is, and did actually not experience it, as they said?"
no, I'm arguing against A for two reasons
1. his childhood doesn't have the kind of discriminatory experiences (housing or not) that someone who grew up in the US, during his formative years.
2. he says he's never been discriminated against in a housing situation, and I say if he was, he'd never know it. just like these muslims/"curry people" would never know it unless someone from the inside blew the whistle on it.
So Im suggesting he proudly talks about how great the US is because he's never experienced the confusion of being "accepted" by white america as one of their own (ie. American) and then rejected by white america as a foreign element. If A (or any of us) went to this dallas housing complex, and got turned away, he'd broadly smile thinking they really didn't have any available spots and would never be the wiser to being discriminated against.
A is not dumb, or oblivious, he's just without certain experiences, which explains why he (and many in his position) think that way.
Also, on top of that, I'd add with his background, his accent, his behavior, etc.. when he meets someone who is clearly 'American' (read : white ) there's no confusion. he looks at them, and sees american (and they're comfortable with that) they look at him and see Indian (which he's completely comfortable with)
I believe his belief that "he's never been discriminated against in a housing situation" is based on never having been rejected ("not even a single time I was denied on any application for renting an apartment or house.")
In other words, if every time you've gone to vote you've actually voted, then it stand to reason you've never been denied the right to vote based on your ethnicity.
A wrote:
This has got to be the dumbest statement made here.
Why did you neglect to mention caste, the most divisive cultural aspect of India? Is it because you believe in this most abominable discrimination of all?
Face it, when it comes to unjust discrimination, not just in housing but in every aspect of life, Indians wrote the damn book. Which is why it is so hypocritical to see desis, especially caste defenders, whining about discrimination when they escape from the horror they created in India to more egalitarian western nations.
Agreed Shilip, but even many of my DBD friends fell that there is subtle racism but end up rationalizing it as due their accents.
Linzi - You are mixing class, caste & skin color. You will be discriminated based on your caste & class but rarely based just on your skin color (except during searching for a bride)
NC wrote:
This is good advice. There is no denying that indian cooking smells cling and linger. And nauseate non-desis. Desi style of cooking, with too much spices frying in too much oil with too much onions and garlic, really stinks. Spices especially turmeric are good for you but I wonder how much of that goodness is lost in the process of frying in hot oil. It would be much healthier to steam the food and then sprinkle the spices on it. The desi diet, along with desi physical laziness, may be the reason why desis are the most unhealthy people in the world.
Anyone, like LinZi, who tries to equate caste with skin color is lying and is upto no good. That includes many desis as well.
The rampant colorism in India is a consequence of Indian servility towards its conquerors from west and central asia and europe. It has nothing to do with caste. Indians have been taught by their foreign rulers to hate their own skin and have been too stupid to get over it despite decades of "independence".
All large groups are hypocritical because they contain diversity. One could say, for example,that the Press is hypocritical because it labels Major Nidal Hasan a terrorist while denying the label for Joseph Stack. But this assertion is unconvincing if the person calling Hasan a terrorist is different from the person not calling Stack one. You can't take 2 separate entities within the press with different opinions and then charge hypocrisy for the entire press.
Likewise, its meaningless to to say desis are hypocritical. what you need to do to make you case prema is find an individual desi supporting casteism while simultaneously complaining about discrimination here in the USA.. once you do that, juxtapose their two statements with each other in order to expose the hypocrisy.
Good Luck.
Hey look, who Linzi chooses to date is her business only.
Manju wrote:
A fine example of a deceitful indian defending the indefensible. The above actually makes sense to this clown.
1. Do you deny that hereditary casteism is a glaring example of unjust discrimination?
2. Do you deny that the West is far more egalitarian in principle and practice than India?
3. Do you deny that many if not most indians continue to cling to casteism even after they esacpe from India to the West?
4. Do you deny that many of the indians who whine about racism in America etc are casteists?
If such people aren't hypocrites in your book then you are reading from a book written by and for hypocrites.
I agree 100% with your 4 points. My point is not that you're wrong, only that you failed to make your case ---by falling prey to a logical fallacy (what constitutes hypocrisy), failing to supply evidence substraniating your argument, and therefore arguing by assertion.
As i said, what you need to do to make you case is find an individual desi--preferably someone with gravitas, like an SM blogger--supporting casteism while simultaneously complaining about discrimination here in the USA.. Then, extract the actually quotes and juxtapose them.
Once you do that we'll then have a killer case against these hypocrites. But right now, because your argument is so logically flawed and unsubstantiated by evidence, you and i risk losing the battle against these evildoers, despite occupying the morally superior position.
I honestly wish you well as you correct the tragic flaws in your argument,. Don't be discouraged by the work. if what you're saying is correct you should be able to find mountains of evidence and we'll be completely vindicated soon. Good Luck.
"I believe his belief that "he's never been discriminated against in a housing situation" is based on never having been rejected ("not even a single time I was denied on any application for renting an apartment or house.")"
Sure, but that doesn't take away from the fact : if it were to happen, he'd likely not know about it. So stating that it "hasn't happened to me" isn't very instructive. He was just lucky not to have needed to live near Dallas.
Also, it doesn't include any kind of bait and switch, or any other kind of attitudes some of these landlords may have had that could have potentially been based on race, I was once in a situation where a landlord immediately on seeing the non-white status of myself and my roommates, was speaking in monotone, curt answers, obviously trying to discourage us from taking the apartment (he couldnt say it was no longer available)
Voting is a temporary, singular act, that doesn't involve a contract that could potentially extend years, although it does have a similar specific law protecting it, ie the Voting Rights act. (ie no one could say, oh you cook curry, so we don't want you voting in our booths)
"There is definitely a history of dark skinned Indians not getting housing, jobs, and facing harsher penalties. It may not be so starkly obvious among well-educated people in the cities, but go to the slums and see how lives in substandard housing. See who gets held in jail for crimes, and who walks free. See who the police beat in the street. See who lives in certain neighborhoods and who is not allowed."
sorry Linzi, but here is one of those situations where I'd need someone of Indian background, who's spent a considerable amount of time there (ie growing up there) to really corroborate this statement.
I concede darkness makes it complicated on the marriage market, and the attractive sensors are shifted, but India never had water fountains that were "light skinned only"
You should stick to your clown schtick Manju. Logic goes over your head. Obviously.
If you "agree 100%" with my four points how can you continue to insist that it is a logical fallacy? Isnt it the height of stupidity to agree with something illogical on logical grounds?
What part of my assertion: "casteists who complain about discrimination are raving hypocrites" do you find illogical?
Shilip: you are exhibit one substantiating Prema's (Ashoka) grand thesis.. A's original point had to do with discrimination in India (based on religion, etc) and you focus on the alleged lack of systemic skin color discrimination and the absence of jim crow laws while jingoistically only relying on evidence from those who are ethnically indian (well, why don't we just restrict writing about the confederacy to southerners).
sorry Linzi, but here is one of those situations where I'd need someone of Indian background, who's spent a considerable amount of time there (ie growing up there) to really corroborate this statement.
Your conculsion is correct but the path you took to get there is wrong. Like say, if someone said "i know the japanese attacked pearl harbour becase hitler'sa bad man." the point's correct but still logically flawed.
You failed to name the hypocrites and identify the hypocritcal statements. you failed to clsoe the deal.
Shilip Wrote:
>no, I'm arguing against A for two reasons
>1. his childhood doesn't have the kind of discriminatory experiences (housing or not) that someone who grew up in the US, during his formative >years.
>2. he says he's never been discriminated against in a housing situation, and I say if he was, he'd never know it. just like these muslims/"curry >people" would never know it unless someone from the inside blew the whistle on it.
>So Im suggesting he proudly talks about how great the US is because he's never experienced the confusion of being "accepted" by white >america as one of their own (ie. American) and then rejected by white america as a foreign element. If A (or any of us) went to this dallas >housing complex, and got turned away, he'd broadly smile thinking they really didn't have any available spots and would never be the wiser to >being discriminated against.
>A is not dumb, or oblivious, he's just without certain experiences, which explains why he (and many in his position) think that way.
Dear Shilip,
Instead of assuming about my childhood, please ask me. I hope you agree I would know my childhood better than you would know.
1. I grew up facing serious discrimination as a minority in post Nov 1, 1984 mass Sikh killing in Northen part of India. Experience hiding in own home taught critical lessons of the life.
2. I lived and worked (more than one year atleast) in 5 countries on 4 continents and traveled to more than 30 countries on business and pleasure. I rented apartment in five countries in diffrent cities and was denied based on language (Chennai), race (Epping, NSW, Australia) and marital status (Paris, France). I would know if my application for renting was denied and I wrote earlier in the USA, I have been never denied rental place.
On the same time, I am not looking to be accepted by whites, blacks, Indian, South Indians, Sri Lankans, Chinese or people of any origin. I am happy with myself and in my opinion you should be happy with yourself regardless if others accept you or not.
About discrimination, I still maintain the USA is the best place in the world with least discrimination among all the countries I lived and worked. I Among the countries I visited, Brazil appears to be discrimination free but four three days visits are not enough to judge a country.
shilip, i believe that something underlying your premise of being rejected without knowing it is that a potential renter is 1. either not told of all available listings when attempting to enquire, based upon their name/accent or 2. is told that the preferred unit is not available upon knowing their name or accent. but what about situations where listings are public - i.e. no element of dscrimination in having potential tenants know which units are available (since most landlords and real estate agencies want to advertise to as large a market as possible) AND the said desi tenant gets their pick of such advertised units, every single time? is this not possible and indicative that in some situations, with some individuals, discrimination is not a factor?
You keep making a fool of yourself. Explain how the above nonsense is like my original assertion which got your panties in a bunch? Here it is again: "when it comes to unjust discrimination, not just in housing but in every aspect of life, Indians wrote the damn book. Which is why it is so hypocritical to see desis, especially caste defenders, whining about discrimination when they escape from the horror they created in India to more egalitarian western nations." How the hell is that comparable to your idiotic example above? it is retarded to equate the two yet you have the nerve to claim that you are being logical! Logic and morality aren't exactly the forte of the right wing and you are a good example of this handicap.
This is so stupid and silly. You dont need to name names to make a logical point. You are just grabbing at straws to defend the indefensible. It is not working.
Didnt you just "agree 100%" that my point "4. Do you deny that many of the indians who whine about racism in America etc are casteists?" cannot be denied? Which means you know that such people exist. So why even insist (illogically to begin with) that I name names or else my argument is logically flawed? It is pretty obvious that you are as usual not arguing in good faith.
A: Here is what you stated earlier 'Because I was never deined on rental apartment, I have no reason to believe that there is discrimination on rental properties'
So do you have no reason to believe that there is no discrimination in the places where you have rented or do you have no reason to believe that there is discrimination on rental properties in the US in general.
You also stated ' I always rented at the best location of the town. In the USA if you have money, you can get anything regardless of your color, race and gender'
I would imagine that you mean here that if you have the money to rent, you will not face any discrimination in the rental market. Would that be correct?
Shilip, correct me if I am wrong but I dont recall hearing a peep from you about the unjust discriminatory nature of hereditary casteism. Why is that?
Didn't Gandhi say that the change you want to see in the world should begin with yourself? Have you renounced casteism? If not why not? If so shouldn't you at least be just as critical about it as you are of white racism towards indians/desis?
It has to be said that as the rental market has moved from being owned by private landlords to big corporations, the discrimination has actually gone down. If the potential landlord is a 64 year old white guy who is uncomfortable with 'colored folks', he is way more likely to discriminate than your 19 year old white girl who takes your application and works for $8 an hour for a huge corporation which owns and manages 5000 units.
There has always been some debate as to what constitutes "racist, abusive, intolerant, or anti-secular," but can we all agree that Prem-- I mean Ashoka is on way on the wrong side of the line?
Ashoka = Prema = Troll
Any fool who goes around and exclaims that Indians are the only groups of immigrants that come from a society that has prejudice systems in their home country and therefore are denied due process in the US is an idiot.
How about the African immigrants from Ethiopia, to Uganda, to Nigeria, to Rwanda that has systems of discrimination based on tribe and genocide commited b/c of tribal loyalites. Systemic starving of groups of people within a particular tribe...How about Russians immigrating over here, when there has been systemic persecution of Jews thruout their history, communist and pre-Revolutionary, pograms galore; how about Irish immigrants coming over from the Great Famine, when groups such as Jews were systematically kicked out of England and Ireland and gypsies persecuted, not to mention the racial disparities going on today? How about the signers of the Constitution coming from slave-owning cultures - what right did they have to complain about British colonial oppression. LOL; How about Chinese immigrants who systematically had a feudal system first and those in the bottom of the system where exploited as bad as say lower castes in fuedal India? How about Chinese immigrants of today, who's system of government, eradicated anyone or any group who did not fit with the homogenous model that Red China had. If you are Chinese Muslim, - you're way of life is eradicated unless you homogenize. The list goes on ...what an incredible pea brain you have Prema. A one - track mind. I could be talking about Lakshmi Menon walking in John Paul Gaultier show this weekend and somehow the discussion would come back to caste.
Prema's(Ashoka's) whole premise is stupid and based on racism towards Indians. It's best to ignore her comments and I wish her racist comments (which have NOTHING to do with blog entry) would get deleted.
Why can't Prema
We pay for this by having to put up with arbitrary and counterproductive rules, copious paperwork, higher prices, the possibility of corruption, and the callous, unsympathetic rigidity of a heartless system that can scarcely be reasoned with or appealed to.
Trade-offs suck.
SMIntern - Why doesn't Prema's comments fall under the blog rules of - " racist, abusive,., non-issue-focused flames; intolerant or anti-secular comments; and long, obscure rants may be deleted" and be deleted?
In both cases you have a situation where the conclusion is correct but the statement is still illogical.
The naming names refers to the lack of evidence you provide, which is another obvious flaw in your argument besides being illogical. The illogical part refers to relying on a large group of individuals (desis) to demonstrate hypocrisy. This is illogical becase any large group will contain individuals whose opinons contradict with other people's opinons within the group. But that not hypocrisy. SM is not hypocritical becase someone denies castism is a problem but someone esle on the blog is angry about jim crow.
its only hypocrisy if those two opinions are held by the same person.
Becase you win arguments by providing data backing up your thesis, not by asuming the data is there. also, one must keep an open mind. its possible we're wrong or that our argument is overstated. by failing to provide data to supstantiate our argument, you've put our entire thesis in doubt.
PS wrote:
Name a country that has a system as insanely prejudiced and discriminatory as the hindu hereditary caste system. The fact that you believe that indian-americans who continue to subscribe to such a stupid and evil system should not be called hypocrites for whining about the much milder discriminations they face in America says a LOT about you.
Secondly, stop lying: nowhere did I say that indian-americans should be denied due process in America. My point is that those who find the american laws against discrimination moral and rational should have the intellectual and moral honesty to passionately renounce casteism. Else they are nothing but hypocrites. You seem to have a problem with such honesty of character and intellect.Why?
You really are thick. Let me ask you for the umpteenth time: why is it "illogical" to argue that those who believe in discrimination on the basis of hereditary caste are hypocrites for complaining about discrimination on the basis of hereditary race/color/etc?
You need to retake Logic 101. You keep insisting on names as if a logical argument depends on them. Clearly you know squat about logic. As for evidence of the existence of the hypocrites I am talking about you already agreed "100%" that they exist. Harping on names is proof of your stupidity and/or dishonest intentions.
Just cannot help being dishonest can you? I asked "4. Do you deny that many of the indians who whine about racism in America etc are casteists?" and you agreed "100%" that it cannot be denied. Were you lying then? If not why do you keep insisting that names be named?
Ashoka wrote:
Many commentators have compared Israel's treatment of Palestinians to the apartheid system of South Africa.
Thats not illogical. I agree with that.This is illogical:
Here, you claim desis are hypocritical. You single out caste defenders as especially so ("desis, especially caste defenders") but tellingly keep the rest of the desis within the hypocritical class. This is illogical because it is not hypocrisy to hold belief that contradict with the belleifs of others within your ethnic group. its only hypocrisy if you contradict your own belifs. also, your paradigm is tantamount to blaming some individuals for the actions of others within their ethnic group, which is racist. which is also illogical.
no, the lack of names doesn't make your argument illogical. its your reasoning i deconstructed above that makes your argument illogical. the lack of names makes your argument unsubstantiated.
Is not about me. its about the others. to the extent its about me, by supplying such illogical and unsubstantiated arguments, you make me look bad...which is a really hard thing to do.
Pagal_Aadmi Wrote:-
>A: Here is what you stated earlier 'Because I was never deined on rental apartment, I have no reason to believe that there is discrimination on >rental properties'
>So do you have no reason to believe that there is no discrimination in the places where you have rented or do you have no reason to believe >that there is discrimination on rental properties in the US in general.
>You also stated ' I always rented at the best location of the town. In the USA if you have money, you can get anything regardless of your color, >race and gender'
>I would imagine that you mean here that if you have the money to rent, you will not face any discrimination in the rental market. Would that be >correct?
Pagal_Admi,
IMO, if you have money you will not face discrimination. That is correct. Home owners want their rental properties to be rented out at reasonable rent and renter keep it neat and clean. Rental properties are meant to provide money to owners. Would not you rent your property to the person who pays more rent? It is hypotheitcal question as I don't know if you are in that kind of business and also market is pretty bad for renting also..atleast in this area.
"IMO, if you have money you will not face discrimination." - well obviously looking at American history that's not the case. There were blacks that had access to money even during jim crow period and they were systematically discriminated against. This issue with the muslim/curry eaters is a clear example where money doesn't always protect against irrational prejudice and xenophobia.
PS,
I am talking about NOW.
"NOW."
Yes, now as in the time of muslim/curry eaters denied housing? Unfortunately I do believe for many in the US the systemic discrimination which involves race or ethnicity is still a factor to consider. There's a lot of relevance in the Fair Housing Act to today.
PS,
Do you think that will continue to the case even after the media report? I doubt.
Do you think that will continue to the case even after the media report? I doubt.
I guess it depends on the logistics of the case. It may be difficult to prove discrimination. And this is only one instance where some folks inside the company blew the whistle. How much harder might this case be to prove, if there were no insiders talking about this prejudice? So I can't believe this is an isolated example, do you.
My boss, who is black, recently won a case against a hotel that discriminated against him. I don't know the logistics of the case but I'm pretty sure there's other cases just like it. I have spoken about people who worked for my family in the hotel/motel business also spoke confidently about not letting blacks rent out a room. I've met Indians in the hotel/motel industry say how they don't like renting out rooms to X - and I've told them that's illegal and we can't pick or choose by race.
Money can influence things and help ease racial discrimination, but the examples from today show it can't eradicate all illogical, hateful attitudes in the US or anywhere for that matter. The market is not going to straighten this out by itself; which is why it is important that the fair housing act and civil rights laws were put into place by the govt and so even today we can rely on these laws to stop discrimination.
"sorry Linzi, but here is one of those situations where I'd need someone of Indian background, who's spent a considerable amount of time there (ie growing up there) to really corroborate this statement. "
I can give put you in contact with some, if you'd like.
That part was a sloppy generalization (that I made twice) based on the general observation that the great majority of indians are indeed casteists. Even sikhs in the US are casteist sudra jats even though sikhism, like buddhism, explicitly rejects caste. But I made a more rigorous post and while agreeing with it 100% you continue to idiotically demand names as if that changes anything. Here is the post again:
1. Do you deny that hereditary casteism is a glaring example of unjust discrimination?
2. Do you deny that the West is far more egalitarian in principle and practice than India?
3. Do you deny that many if not most indians continue to cling to casteism even after they esacpe from India to the West?
4. Do you deny that many of the indians who whine about racism in America etc are casteists?
If such people aren't hypocrites in your book then you are reading from a book written by and for hypocrites.
Your response to this post was: "you failed to make your case ---by falling prey to a logical fallacy (what constitutes hypocrisy), failing to supply evidence substraniating your argument, and therefore arguing by assertion."
What is the "logical fallacy" in this argument? Where is the logic in demanding "evidence" when you agreed that point 4 cannot be denied? This is why you come across as a defender of casteism who is not arguing in good faith. Instead of grabbing at straws and beating around the bush why don't you answer this simple question: do you find hereditary casteism an immoral and irrational social system or not?
"1. I grew up facing serious discrimination as a minority in post Nov 1, 1984 mass Sikh killing in Northen part of India. Experience hiding in own home taught critical lessons of the life."
I'd be interested to hear more about this, if you'd be willing to expound on it. Are you a Sikh? Were Sikhs thought of as foreigners in India? Did you have some non Sikhs accept you, only to have others not? One thing about things like this, is, while they are horrible, they are very clear. It's the reason why many preferred southern racism to northern racism, southern was very clear about it, they made no mistake or did not attempt to hide their feelings about you.
And your statements about America being the best land or whatever it is, is something which I feel comes from an uninformed past, your discriminatory experiences in northern india included.
"but what about situations where listings are public - i.e. no element of dscrimination in having potential tenants know which units are available (since most landlords and real estate agencies want to advertise to as large a market as possible) AND the said desi tenant gets their pick of such advertised units, every single time? is this not possible and indicative that in some situations, with some individuals, discrimination is not a factor?"
I agree. I never asserted that discrimination will be present in every interaction. I only state that if it is present, the victim would not likely know about it, as it must be practiced covertly. And I also gave an example of a a priori knowledge of availability and the presence of discrimination (curt answers, etc... basically what amounts to discouragement to renting, without explicitly saying 'you can't rent here')
LinZi wrote:
Now you are trying to equate black with monkey. Earlier you tried to equate color with caste. The reality in India often is that low caste sudras such as jats are lighter-skinned (though still dark by global standards) than bihari brahmins who are often jet black. And monkeys in India tend to be white-skinned and pink faced which is why the british colonizers, and contemporary white tourists, had/have the epithet "lal bandar" hurled at them by the desi riffraff.
I dont know what your agenda is but I suspect that you are upto no good. Consciously or otherwise.
"s this not possible and indicative that in some situations, with some individuals, discrimination is not a factor?"
I'm not even challenging his assertion that he himself never experienced discrimination in the US regarding housing. I only say if it were to happen to him (the way it happened to these other people in dallas) , he'd likely be unaware (as any other of us would be), and I also challenge his extrapolation of his housing experiences to a larger contention that "there's no, or less discrimination in the US" ie , statements like this
"About discrimination, I still maintain the USA is the best place in the world with least discrimination among all the countries I lived and worked"
...which I think stem from not being raised in the US, and experiencing discrimination in subtle fashions, or having a feeling of "mixed identity" where acceptance and rejection often swing back and forth like a pendulum.
There is no logical fallacy in that argument. The logical fallacies occurered earlier, which you just now conceed : "That part was a sloppy generalization (that I made twice)" so I now accept the revisoin as represenatative of your real thoughts on the matter.
The evidence is not for me but for others. As it is, you merely presented an arguent by assertion. I like to see a good thumping of the enemy. You don't do that by merely claiming the enemy is "hypocritcal", you demontrate their hypocrisy by revealing hteir hypocritcal statements.
sure. those who asked joe mccarthy for evidence came accorss to anti-commuinsts as fellow travelers. but they wrere the real anti-communists, because they understood false accusations undermine the cause. hurling vagui accusations without naming names that can be checked is a hallmark of mccarthyism. but calling this out does not make one a communist. ergo, i'm not a casteist.
I do.
I am waiting for the inevitable losertar, er I mean, libertarian to chime in that discrimination such as this should be perfectly legal.
losertar??????????
What's I genuinely don't understand is that I've never heard of a muslim committing terrorist acts in their own homes...seems like living right next door would be the safest place, but whatever.
Yeah, no muslim terrorist has even used his home to make a bomb.
The folks at CAIR weren’t too surprised that this type of thing happens given some Gallup Center for Muslim Studies poll data from last month:
Why do some here act like CAIR is some great group, when many of there members have ties to groups that have links to terrorist groups?
The fact that you stubbornly ignored the later argument and kept on yakking about a previous generalization exposes your dishonest intentions. As does your ad nauseam repetitive demand that names be named or else the argument is not valid. That was sheer idiocy and clear proof that you are not arguing in good faith. Since you are claiming (dishonestly as usual) to be on my side against the "enemy", then why the hell do you not name names? Cut the fricking bullcrap already. You are not fooling anyone with a brain and a clue.
Since you agree with me that many of the indians who whine about racism in America etc are casteists why don't you name the names that convinced you that my point is "100%" true? You have the evidence right? If not why did you agree with me? See how stupid you are?
You are as thick as a brick if that actually makes sense to you. Your previous example of Hitler and Pearl Harbor was even more asinine. There was nothing vague about my argument. It is logically impeccable. And it was not a personal accusation against a few specific individuals. So your idiotic demand for names is BS.
I have read enough of your posts to doubt your honesty here as well.
I am talking about NOW.
There are a lot of subtle ways in which discrimination can happen and which you may not even realize unless you are "tuned in" to such tactics. You may not be shown some apartments. You may be deliberately shown apartments in particular areas only. You may be told falsely that an apartment is unavailable. Uncovering such tactics is not straightforward. In the labour market too, such tactics are known. Sometime back, there was a (by now, well-known) economics paper by Sendhil Mullainathan and Marianne Bertrand "Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal?" which performed a "field experiment" to uncover the subtle screening done by employers based on the names of applicants. The authors constructed fictitious but identical pairs of resumes, one with a "Black" name and the other with a "White" name. They found that applications sent with the "White" names were more likely to generate positive responses. This experiment was replicated in the Indian context by Surinder Jodhka and Katherine Newman with Dalit and Muslims names (on the one hand) and "upper caste" names on the other. It was reported sometime back in the Economic and Political Weekly
All this is not really surprising. Law, as we now know in USA, India and many other places does not automatically remove entrenched prejudices. They simply come through in other subtle forms. The fight against such prejudices is never easy.
Btw. A, your story about discrimination in Chennai reminds me of this somewhat funny story told by Ramachandra Guha in one of his books on cricket. Since you stayed in Chennai, you are probably aware that there is a small Tamil-speaking Sikh community in Chennai. Indeed, right from the 1940s to the 1980s, the Tamil Nadu cricket team always had a Sikh member, all from the same family. At some point, one member of this family went to Delhi where his job took him. As a Tamilian Sikh, he didn't feel comfortable anywhere in Delhi except in the Tamil enclave in Karol Bagh. So he looked for a place to stay there only to have the door shut on him. He succeeded only when he took along a Tamil friend who informed the landlords that his friend was really a Tamilian etc. etc.
I didn't ignore it. I addressed it repeatedly. The "argument by assertion" debunking applies to the latter argument. You never disowned the previous argument until much later, so i continued to address that as a logical fallacy.
without evidence, its merely argument by assertion. very unconvincing.
I did. see post 120.
other than 120, my evidence is anecdotal. It confirms your assertions so i'm inclined to agree with you but anecdotal evidence is weak (the observer could be biased, you don't have access to all the data, etc) so i didn't bother to make the aggressive points that you did.. usually i wait until someone commits hypocrisy before i call them out on it.
but you didn't. you accused desis of hypocrisy without any visible hypocrisy occurring. but yet you have no evidence to back up the claim. If yuou want to fight on my side you need to improve your skills. very weak, young man.
saying desis are hypocritical without specifying who, is vague. You've already conceded the illogical aspect of your original argument.
so you believe your arguments are not vague while simultaneously asserting they're not specific. Ooooookaaaaaaaay.
and you have mountains of evidence to support this claim, no doubt.
"What's I genuinely don't understand is that I've never heard of a muslim committing terrorist acts in their own homes...seems like living right next door would be the safest place, but whatever."
The same is said of serial killers, all of Jeffrey Dahmer's neighbors were unharmed.
"Law, as we now know in USA, India and many other places does not automatically remove entrenched prejudices."
That's true, but I think, if A has had a similar experience to me, that it is much easier to discriminate in India than in the U.S. I could probably name at least 5 instances off the top of my head where housing was denied to me or my friends in Delhi based on race, and I was only linving in Delhi for about 6 months. Maybe more if I think for a little while. This didn't just include straight up "oh wait, you're American [or African, in the case of some friends]? Never mind, we can't rent to you." But also the "it's not available anymore" as well as other tactics. The apartment I did end up renting (and a few I was offered) upped the rent upon seeing me, and also overcharged for other things-- like electricity. When I looked up the actual electricity rate and complained (they were charging me over twice as much) they just ignored me.
It is the same in job applications there-- for example, Indian airline companies put out adverts for new flight attendants with things like the range of heights and weights, the fairness of skin, the clearness of skin (no zitty flight attendants please!) all as part of the job requirement. So there is a very open and obvious example of hiring based on skin color, among other things. (There is a claim there that you can't have overweight flight attendants for "safety reasons", and women have been fired for being a few pounds over the company designated weight)
I think Shilip is right that while this stuff DOES still happen in America, it is not as obvious as some of the blatant stuff that can go on elsewhere, like India. That is because we have laws in place that make it harder for people to be outright about it. That, mixed with whistleblowing incidences like this help to protect people to a greater extent. So it is true that someone may have experienced it and not realized it, but I think it is also true that A could have not experienced it-- I think it may depend on where you are and who you are interacting with, and perhaps the luck of the draw.
That is because we have laws in place that make it harder for people to be outright about it.
The key is the US has laws which are enforced. India, too, has laws - all too many, by my reckoning but with many of them, it's as though they never exist. Go a few miles outside any major town and untouchability is still openly practised.
Now why India is so bad at enforcing existing laws is a good question. I remember reading (an article by Kaushik Basu, the current chief economic advisor to the Indian Prime Minister, perhaps?) that laws work best when there is a substantial consensus in society about the desirability of the law. The law effectively formalizes the existing consensus in society. It is a weakness of Indian democracy that laws are often passed by parliament without much debate. Furthermore, to the extent there is a debate, it mainly involves the English-speaking elite. Things are changing - the type of power that a few people around Indira Gandhi wielded in the 1970s is unimaginable now but Indian democracy, in my opinion, still lacks the kind of broad participation that characterizes mature democracies.
I could probably name at least 5 instances off the top of my head where housing was denied to me or my friends in Delhi based on race, and I was only linving in Delhi for about 6 months.
If its any consolation, LinZi, Indians also have a lot of trouble finding houses to rent in Delhi. Part of the problem is the stupid rent control law which makes it very difficult to evict a tenant. So any Indian who goes to rent a place in Delhi will have to answer a whole set of very personal questions: Where do you work? What does your father do? What does your mother do? How many brothers and sisters do you have? What do they do? Are you married? From which part of India do you come from? ...and so on and so forth. It sounds bizarre but you have to remember that the landlord. by asking such questions, is effectively trying to figure out how likely it is that you will create problems down the line.
This is not just idle conjecture. Here's a story told to me by an acquaintance: An officer in the Indian Air Force rented out his place. One year before he was due to retire, he informed his tenant that since he going to retire, he would need the house back and that he was giving him a year's notice. The tenant simply refused to move confident that even if he was hauled to court, he could bank on the interminable delays in the justice system to continue staying in the house. What happened? A couple of months before the deadline the air force officer marched his regiment to the house, held the family at gunpoint and proceeded to throw all the belongings onto the street. A good example of how bad laws can turn ordinarily law abiding people into criminals.
It is fear of problems like these that lead some house owners to keep their house vacant rather than rent them. My understanding is that a significant number of houses in Delhi and even other places are lying vacant even though there is a housing shortage. This is not to deny the racial element in your experience but just to note that other things may be going on too.
"It is fear of problems like these that lead some house owners to keep their house vacant rather than rent them. My understanding is that a significant number of houses in Delhi and even other places are lying vacant even though there is a housing shortage. This is not to deny the racial element in your experience but just to note that other things may be going on too. "
Oh, definitely. I think the racial element is certainly part of a MUCH bigger problem, like you said... a lot of my Indian friends have problems renting places too-- and no matter who you are, many landlords feel they have the right to put certain rules on you-- some I can sort of understand (please only cook veg food in the house seems reasonable if that is your religious belief), others are pretty crazy... like if you are not home by 9 pm we will lock you out. (I had lots of fun trying to find an apartment because I was teaching English during the afternoon/evening shift, and so would get home at about 10 every night (later if I ate dinner out before coming home). Others will say no guests, or no guests of the opposite sex, etc etc. Some landlords want to run their tenants life like they are their parents. So if a young unmarried adult wants an apartment it is a lot of problems! In addition to the job, etc issues, and then racial issues too....
If you look up the phone book there are hundreds of white Americans with the last name Curry. And don't forget Rice. But is this discrimination about rice and curry, or is it based on something more diabolical, such as the post 9/11 fear of irrational jihadi violence? If more mainstream muslims don't vehemently oppose the jihadi idiots, the Republicans will eventually ban Islam the way they banned Communism during the cold war. That would be a problem not just for muslims but for most of us who are not muslim because a lot of Americans (the "guns and religion" type) probably think all brown folk are "curry people".
This is really funny. You agreed "100%" with my 4 points even though you find it "very unconvincing" without "evidence"! How very logical of you ;)
Same stupidity as above. You fully agreed with my latter argument yet are hell bent on "debunking" it! Anyone can see that you have not been arguing in good faith.
You keep repeating the same nonsense ad nauseam. So I will keep asking you ad nauseam: why did you agree with my 4 points? Why did you claim to have named a name substantiating my charge?
Endless stupidity and self-contradiction: There is nothing at all vague about my logical argument you ignoramus. Even you were compelled to agree with it.
Look you thickheaded hypocritical dunce, my argument does not need to name names. It clearly specifies those desis as hypocrites who while believing in casteism complain about white racism towards them. Again, for the umteenth time, why did you agree 100% with my 4 points in the first place?
That is called intellectual honesty, which is an alien concept to shysters like you. Your posts are full of illogic but we have yet to see you concede any of your numerous errors.
I agreed with the conclusion, but not because of your "argument." If someone said "sugar ray Robinson is the greatest boxer ever", i'd agree. buts this is not convincing to someone who believes its actually Ali.
Its important to keep your own side on its toes. you're a weak liink so i'm working on you.
personal anecdotal experience.
Because in 120 i did just that: "Shilip: you are exhibit one substantiating Prema's (Ashoka) grand thesis."
One of your flaws is your too simplistic. things aren' t necessarily mutually exclusive. in other words, one can agree with the conclusions of an argument while the argument can still be vague. so i might agree with sarah palin that school choice is a good idea, but sarah palin's argument may still be inane. you're sarah palin.
Au contraire. it only became clear after i worked you over. the first construction of your argument was inane. now, the second one is better but still weak since it lacks evidence. but now you see how i'm already making you better. keep working at it.
The flaw in your argument is that your just asserting my posts are full of illogic. what you need to do to substantiate your argument is pull the illogical quotes and demonstrate why they are such.
This moved too fast and I am not able to catch up.
Shilip,
This is not the right forum for Sikh history. Email me if you are really interested and I may write on my blog at http://arealblogger.blogspot.com/
Shilip, please do not make it personal and once again please do not assume anything about exposure to the USA or other countries. As I said I am well traveled and can understand discrimination. I am not sure how can one make an opinion about someone by just reading few statements in the comments of a blog. I personally take my own time to form opinion about a person and for that matter a country.
Annoymous,
I really like your examples and detailed analysis. Do you have a blog?
Same with Linzi
Good for you.
If that were true for everyone the ACLU and Fair Housing department in Government, to name two anti-discrimination organizations out of many, would not have to deal with current discrimination cases brought by all types of people for all sorts of acts of discrimination such as housing.
On a separate issue, why do so many threads here devolve into, well, Indians/India sucks even more, in fact no one in the entire world is as horrible as Indians living in or fleeing from horrible India for such a horribly long time, in fact the whole history of mankind, courtesy of one commenter or another with an extremely biased anti-India/n agenda.
Even if Indians are the worst people ever in the world, Indians still have every right to stand up for their rights when they are discriminated against just like everyone else does and everyone else should against everyone who discriminates against them for whatever reason. There is nothing in those anti-discrimination organizations that require people who are discriminated against to be as spotless as an angel of heaven before they can file a discrimination complaint. The act of discrimination is not right period - regardless of who does it and to whom it is done.
"On a separate issue, why do so many threads here devolve into, well, Indians/India sucks even more"
For me, at least, I don't think India or Indians "suck". I think there are problems in India AND in the rest of the world, including America. The only reason I bring up topics of problems in India is when people purposefully deny that they happen-- acting as if India is perfect and wonderful and the only problems of racism/discrimination exist in America. It's not true. No nation is perfect, and I understand people can be 'touchy' about their ancestral/current land, but who does it help to stick your head in the sand and pretend nothing bad ever happens in India? That's the same as people who think "America is the best country in the world. Nothing bad happens here!"
Can we really get a nuanced view of discrimination and how it effects people by only focusing on one example, and not understanding how that example get fit into a larger world pattern?
On a separate issue, why do so many threads here devolve into, well, Indians/India sucks even more, in fact no one in the entire world is as horrible as Indians living in or fleeing from horrible India for such a horribly long time, in fact the whole history of mankind, courtesy of one commenter or another with an extremely biased anti-India/n agenda.
I believe it's just a few people, particularly Prema, who write stereotypes and hatred for Indians. And then a few people jump on the bandwagon. I seriously don't get it. How can anyone ignore the horrible systems of injustice in almost every part of the world, some equalling genocide, such as in China or Rwanda, and then act like only Indians are capable of abusing others. Sigh...I believe some people do this to seem cool, "look at me I can criticize my own culture" and others do it b/c of self-hatred.
"How can anyone ignore the horrible systems of injustice in almost every part of the world, some equalling genocide, such as in China or Rwanda, and then act like only Indians are capable of abusing others."
...or maybe because this website is for/about desis? Not Chinese people or Rwandans?
"This is not the right forum for Sikh history. Email me if you are really interested and I may write on my blog at http://arealblogger.blogspot.com/
Shilip, please do not make it personal and once again please do not assume anything about exposure to the USA or other countries. As I said I am well traveled and can understand discrimination. I am not sure how can one make an opinion about someone by just reading few statements in the comments of a blog. I personally take my own time to form opinion about a person and for that matter a country"
What is the assumption I've made? You yourself you stated (post 87) you came here on a work sponsorship, I guess I've assumed you were a fully matured adult when that happened. Apologies if you were a boy genius that completed his masters at age 6, and came here to work at age 7.
"As I said I am well traveled and can understand discrimination."
How can you say you understand the way discrimination works in the US? That to me, is an indefensible claim on your part. You said there were some discriminatory experiences you had during your formative years, and I asked for clarification, which you now state is not the proper forum for. Let me ask you again then, was there ever a point in time where you felt "not Indian" in your childhood? Im guessing the answer is no. But I (and I'd say nearly everyone else in my position) Im positive has felt "not-American" even though this is the land of our (in many cases) birth, and upbringing.
In particular the nuanced and mixed signal fashion that applies to people who are raised in that country, when you yourself are not? I already acquiesced you may not have personally experienced housing discrimination, however to me that just means you were not unlucky enough to get shafted like the people in this post (who we wouldn't even know about had it not been for an internal whistle blower on the matter) But that's inconclusive to make a general statement about the US being some beacon of prosperity that doesn't discriminate.
Maybe thats the conclusion you draw, based on the incomplete information you have. And I acknowledge that (and observe it in others), but make no mistake about what is causing your erroneous conclusion.
.or maybe because this website is for/about desis? Not Chinese people or Rwandans?
I hear you; And I'm all for this blog and anyone taking down issues and problems in India. In fact Indians do a lot of that - look at our newspapers and blogs - we're not afraid to criticize each other and hopefully with that comes change. You don't see this same analysis in other nations' press and I see it as a sign of self-confidence culturally.
Reminds me of reading Sen's "Argumentative Indian"
However, what I can't stand is what I don't do to other people - which is make comments and analyze them in an ahistorical, hateful, stereotyping, generalizing manner. How can anyone make a statement that says "All Indians are hypocrites to complain about discrimination in the US b/c of the caste system" w/o recognizing that this same logic applies to most of the world? - maybe not some hunter-gatherer tribes (I don't know). Seriously commonsense is just missing from statements like these, alongside their ignorance.
"However, what I can't stand is what I don't do to other people - which is make comments and analyze them in an ahistorical, hateful, stereotyping, generalizing manner."
Agreed--
and any argument with words like "all" "everyone" etc can't be anything but false to begin with....
"This moved too fast and I am not able to catch up."
Here's the abridged version :
"Dunce, Idiot, Hypocrite, You're stupid" (repeat 50x)
Enough of your silly deceitful games.You probably think you are being very clever playing this silly charade. Think again. You are not on my side. There is no way someone like you who defends the vile, racist rabble rouser Rush Limbaugh, could be on my side. I absolutely loathe that hatefilled scoundrel and his millions of trashy racist dittoheads.
Shilip,
Calm down dude. I am referring to the following statement of your post 146
>And your statements about America being the best land or whatever it is, is something which I feel comes from an uninformed past, your
>discriminatory experiences in northern india included.
You have no means to know it. After Northen India, I had life in 4 continents as I mentioned earlier on and guess you did not read it.
In my first experience of renting an apartment, I asked the Sales Representatvie if there are any Indians in the subdivision and she said she is not allowed to give me that information as it may create bias. She gave me exact same listing that were in the newspaper. I looked at several one of them and settled for a new one. Tell me how can I even doubt if there was any kind of discrimination?
Later she became a friend and asked me:- Why Indians want to rent near Indians? In fact several times people asked her if there were any Tamils/Telgus etc.
If I had good experience in renting I am free to say it and not wiling to accept that I cannot or could not figure out discrimation for any reason made up some people who know everything about me based on four lines that I wrote.
Well then consider that I've mentioned my agreement with you in the past:
Just because an argument is logical doesn't make it convincing. If I say, there's a lot of Communists working in the state department, that may be a logical statement, it may even be true, but its not convincing. In order to convince you need to present the evidence. name names.
You reformulated in response to my criticism. So i take credit for improving you. I keep repeating it only because you keep asking the same question. so i give you the same answer.
.This doesn't address my take down of you. I said things aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. you reply that they can be. sure, they can be, but its still not necessary. ergo, your claim that your argument is unvague because i agreed with it is flawed...because one can indeed agree with a vague claim. in fact, its because i agree with your claim that i'm taking you to task for your unconvincing arguments. you make me look bad. not unlike the vile racsim of rush limbaugh. you descend into the same unnuanced simplistic biogtry, as you're beginning to concede, to your credit.
because undocumented anecdotal evidence--the type that i have to back up your claims--is untrustworthy. first its undocumented so no one can check it. its susceptible to observer bias and may be too incomplete. so basically, a good debater doesn't rely on such hearsay. if you want to win the battle you need to provide actual evidence. which you routinely fail to do. ergo,. you're making our side look bad.
Ahhhh...the self-hating ABD or DBD are out in full-force.
What would you do if you owned the apartment complex, wanted to keep it fully occupied, and a bunch of Nigerians also wanted to live there. Or is SM full of renters and not owners?