February 5, 2014

Time: Amy Chua is racist (as are Samuel Huntington, Thomas Sowell, Adam Carolla, Madison Grant, Jason Richwine, and some lady from the Congo)

In Time Magazine, an Indian-American novelist, author of Maximum City, a book about Bombay (which he resents calling by its new Hindu nationalist name of Mumbai), lists numerous people whose racism you should be shocked by. Below is Mehta's article, with his Google Voice annotations.
The 'Tiger Mom' Superiority Complex 
By Suketu Mehta 
From time to time, every Indian American finds an email in his or her inbox, wearing a font of many colors, like the one my grandfather once sent me: "Take a Pride--Being an Indian. 38% of Doctors in U.S.A. are Indians. 36% of NASA employees are Indians. 34% of MICROSOFT employees are Indians.

And 100% of the CEOs of Microsoft! Boo-yah! In-di-a! In-di-a! In-di-a!
"India invented the Number System. Decimal Point was also invented by India. Sanskrit is the most suitable language for computer software ..." 

Of course, that was just my grandfather's ethnocentrism speaking. Not me!
On my desk now is a book-length version of such an email: The Triple Package: How Three Unlikely Traits Explain the Rise and Fall of Cultural Groups in America, by Amy Chua and Jed Rubenfeld. You may remember Chua as the "Tiger Mom" whose 2011 memoir about the rigors of Chinese parenting set off waves of anxiety among aspirational American parents who had been raised with Dr. Spock's permissive child-rearing attitudes. Her new book, co-authored with her husband, widens its aim, purporting to explain why not just Asians (like Chua) but also seven other groups--Cubans, Jews (like Rubenfeld), Indians (like me), Nigerians, Mormons, Iranians and Lebanese--are superior when it comes to succeeding in America. 
The book claims that these groups thrive because of three traits: a superiority complex, insecurity and impulse control. The ones lacking the "Triple Package" are African Americans, Appalachians, Wasps and pretty much everybody else. 
Does such thinking shock you?

I should hope so.
If not, it may be because it has become so insidiously commonplace over the past decade as a new strain of racial, ethnic and cultural reductivism has crept into the American psyche and public discourse. Whereas making sweeping observations about, say, African-American or Hispanic culture--flattering or unflattering--remains unthinkable in polite company, it has become relatively normal in the past 10 years to comment on the supposed cultural superiority of various "model minorities." I call it the new racism--and I take it rather personally. 
I am an American, Calcutta born. I'm writing a book about immigrants in New York, dedicated to my two American sons. I want them to know why we came here and how we found our place in this new land. I want them to know about the teachers at the Catholic school in Queens who called me a "pagan," and the boy there who welcomed me to the school by declaring, "Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations," and the landlord who welcomed us to the country by turning off the electricity.

In other words, the most important family memories that my sons are having inculcated in them is that they are Victims of Whites. That's the most important legacy to instruct your children in in the 21st Century.
I also want them to know why their family did well in the end. We worked hard, yes, and we read books and went to the right schools and are "well settled," as our relatives back in India describe us. But we also benefited from numerous advantages--from cultural capital built up over generations to affirmative action to an established network of connections in our new country--none of which had anything to do with racial, ethnic or cultural superiority.

None, I tell you, none!

By the way, why do we Indian immigrants get affirmative action? I could never figure that out. Are you people crazy or something? I'd say thanks, but then you might start figuring out how nuts it is.
When my family went to America, we left behind a system in which people are often denigrated because of their caste, religion, language or skin color.

Not us, actually. The Mehtas are Gujarati diamond merchants from Bombay. Perhaps we're Jains (who dominate the diamond trade) or maybe Parsis (like conductor Zubin Mehta) or Brahmins or merchant caste, but whatever Amy Chua-type Market Dominant Minority I am, I try to keep my privileged ethnicity obscure here in the Colonies States so I can be the Voice of All India to you poor dumb Americans. It's a living.
The U.S., of course, has its own deeply troubled history with regard to race, but its path has tended toward more equality. 
Recently, though, the language of racism in America has changed, though the plot remains the same. It's not about skin color anymore--it's about "cultural traits." And it comes cloaked in a whole lot of social-science babble. The new racialists are too smart to denigrate particular cultures. Instead, they come at things the other way. They praise certain cultures, hold them up as exemplary. The implication--sometimes overt, sometimes only winked at--is that other cultures are inferior and this accounts for their inability to succeed.

When everybody knows it's really their Bad Karma.
The U.S.--like Brazil or England--likes to think it has moved beyond race. After all, we elected a black President, twice. But in reality, the terrain of race-baiting has simply shifted. The condescension once aimed squarely at African Americans now also claims as its targets Latinos, Muslims and--in a novel twist--large swaths of whites. And the people doing the condescending might be black or brown themselves. 
A Congolese immigrant whom I met in the course of researching my book told me about the African Americans she knows at the supermarket where she works. "We are really different," she said about her community, as opposed to African Americans. "They don't have African values. They don't have the values to be black." 
I asked her what that means. 
"To be black," she explained, "means you get married and you don't have children before." The American blacks at her supermarket, she said, need to go to college. "They ask if you want to have marijuana. It's just normal for them. It's easy for them to say that 'My ancestors were oppressed.'" 

Let me be clear that I, Suketu Mehta, didn't say this. An extremely black woman from the Congo said it, not me. She may have been an extremely black woman lesbian pre-op transgender immigrant from the Congo for all I know. In other words, don't blame me for what she said. I'm a person of color myself. I would never ever think that maybe she had a point about African Americans, with whom I stand in utter solidarity from my Manhattan high rise apartment provided to me free by NYU, where -- did I mention? -- I'm a professor. I'm not endorsing the shameful thing she said, I'm just reporting it so we can all cluck in approbation over it.
A book like The Triple Package, even if it takes pains to argue in nonracial terms, is an example of this sort of ethnocentric thinking writ large. And it is only the latest in a long line of books--spanning more than a century--arguing for the superiority of this or that American group over others. The roots of alleged superiority have changed over time from race to class to IQ to religion and now to culture. 
In 1916 Madison Grant wrote The Passing of the Great Race, which purported to demonstrate the racial and cultural superiority of Northern Europeans over Southern Europeans.

I'm annoyed that Time wouldn't give me the column inches to work in a clever reference to Tom Buchanan in The Great Gatsby here.
The book was influential in drumming up popular support for passage of the 1924 Johnson-Reed Act, which barred Asians from immigrating to the U.S. and established quotas for Southern and East Europeans, to keep out Jews.

Which caused the Holocaust.
Decades later, an influential 1959 article by Bernard Rosen

Presumably, not a Jew. I mean, I wouldn't passively-aggressively quote some utterly obscure Jewish person saying something politically incorrect 55 years ago, now would I? I mean, who would write a gigantic passive-aggressive put-on like this article appears to be? I'd have to have grown up in some place like Queens and really resent Jewish domination of the New York literary world to go out of my way to find somebody who isn't a famous Jewish thinker to poke fun at for my own private satisfaction while you can't prove I'm criticising Jewish thinking. Are you implying that this article is just a hoax to see what I could get away with without any editors at Time actually getting the joke?

I mean, Rosen could be a Teuton, right?
declared that "Protestants, Jews and Greeks place a greater emphasis on independence and achievement training than southern Italians and French-Canadians." ...

And that was obviously wrong because TBD
This line of argument expanded in the 21st century. In 2004 Samuel Huntington, the Harvard professor who became famous for his book The Clash of Civilizations, warned against Latino culture in a Foreign Policy cover story bearing the title "José, Can You See?" In his book published the following year, Who Are We? The Challenges to America's National Identity, he explained the differences between Anglo and Latino culture by quoting a Texas entrepreneur on "Hispanic traits ... that 'hold us Latinos back': mistrust of people outside the family; lack of initiative, self-reliance, and ambition; low priority for education; acceptance of poverty as a virtue necessary for entrance into heaven." 

Of course, that's wrong because the 50 million Latinos in America provide only two members of the Forbes 400 while the few million South Asians provide six members. Boo-yah! ... Which just shows how racist America is.
In 2009 an article by Jason Richwine

Shouldn't somebody fire that guy?
, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute

Up to a point, Lord Copper.
, caught the attention of my people with its title, "Indian Americans: The New Model Minority." East Asians continue to excel in the U.S., he noted, but Indians are clearly the latest and greatest model. Why? "Exhibit A is the spelling bee." Success in spelling and other similar cognitive tasks, according to Richwine, proves that we are smarter than whites as well as Ashkenazi Jews--a happy finding for my father, who spent a lifetime in the diamond market, where they have a big presence. Richwine's conclusion: immigration policy should favor these model minorities over, say, Mexicans. 

Obviously, I, Suketu Mehta, utterly disagree with this finding. But I think you should know about it ... just so you can be mad at Richwine. I'm not trying to plant any ideas in your head or anything about how brilliant we Indians are. I'm totally not into saying that us Indian Americans are smarter than you Ashkenazi Jews, but I think you should know that this horrible Jason Richwine person said it. Get 'im. For me. For the children!
Then there is Stanford University's Thomas Sowell, who in Migration and Cultures: A World View identified six model "middleman minorities" who exemplify the entrepreneurial virtues he thinks the U.S. desperately needs. Last year he took the argument to another level, writing that there are some cultures that are just incompatible with Western values, primarily (surprise!) Muslim culture. 

Where are these maniacs coming from recently? Back in the 1970s you'd never hear any vicious racist nonsense like this! What? Sowell's just repeating his 1978 book Ethnic America?

Who knew?
These bromides don't just come thundering down from the ivory tower. They're all around us in casual conversation about group accomplishment and group blame. Typical was a recent podcast by the comedian Adam Carolla,

I heard that Carolla grew up in practically the same neighborhood as that horrible Sailer person.
in which he interviewed San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. Newsom noted that half of Latino and African-American families in California don't have access to a checking account or ATM. 
"What's wrong with them?" asked Carolla. "I want to know why those two groups don't have access ... Are they flawed? ... Do Asians have this problem? ... They were put in internment camps. Are they at the check-cashing places?" 

They own them. No, I didn't say that.
"Look at the history," Newsom responded. "It's naive to suggest that those things don't matter." 
"How about the Jews?" asked Carolla. "No problems in the past? ... Why are the Jews doing well? ... Why do some groups do so much better? I'll tell you why: they have a family who puts an emphasis on education." He may have been speaking lightly, but Carolla's words show how easily the line can blur between cultural praise and cultural denigration. 
Of Ethnicity and Reality 
... The new American racism, however, is turning the clock backward. While Chua and Rubenfeld are not the only ones peddling this pernicious line of thought, their book is likely to make them prominent spokespeople for it. So it's worth taking a close look at the "evidence" they marshal for their argument. Too often they--and their compatriots--ignore the realities of American history to make their half-baked theories stick. 
The authors attempt to barricade themselves against charges of racism by protesting that the Triple Package has nothing to do with race or IQ; it's about ethnicity. So not all blacks are losers--look at Nigerians and Liberians! They are so well represented in the Ivy League! But the authors fail to acknowledge that Africans and Afro-Caribbeans are beneficiaries of affirmative action, won through the civil rights struggles of African Americans.

Which makes what I just said about quotas A-OK. We shall overcome ... Sing it!
What's more, African Americans are not in a bad way because of lack of racial pride

In fact, have you noticed that African Americans seem to have plenty of self-esteem? I'm just sayin' ...
or a problem with their impulses.

I would never say that.
Their challenges as a community trace back centuries; they were brought here in chains, their women raped

Not by me, personally, but your tastes may vary.
and their families deliberately broken. 

Take that, Chua! Let no one ever say that a Chinawoman can out BS an Indiaman.
This is what President Obama was talking about in his remarks after the Trayvon Martin verdict

That Zimmerman guy, I have to say, a year of hiding indoors really did his complexion a world of good. "Wheat-colored" we'd call it in the marriage market personal ads.
, when he said, "I think it's important to recognize that the African-American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that doesn't go away." 

Because History!

Look at all those instructive historical epics, such as 12 Years a Slave, Django Unchained, and Lee Daniels' The Butler. It used to be that blacks caused problems for themselves because of white racism, but now the country has elected some nonentity comfortable-in-his-own-skin Constitutional scholar President because he's black so awesome, so now ... Because History.

In summary, don't blame me: Us Indians just got here!
Time and again, when examining the claims of the new racialists, we find other, deeper, often more complex explanations for why the children of some groups do better than others. 
As Nancy Foner, a leading immigration scholar

Here's the extended Foner family family tree of leftist academics and Marxist labor organizers. Three of her four Foner uncles were blacklisted during the McCarthy era. By the way, I was hoping that Nancy would introduce me to the movie star Gyllenhaal Siblings, but she explained that they are her cousin Eric's ex-wife's children by her second husband, so I'll just have to figure out another way to get my screenplay into Jake's' hands: Maybe I'll tell him, "'The Prince of Persia' changed my life!" D'ya think?
, points out in an essay, "Today, the way East Asian--as opposed to black or Hispanic--immigrants fit into New York's racial hierarchy makes a difference in the opportunities they can provide their children." Because they are not black, she notes, "East Asian (and white) immigrants face less discrimination in finding a place to live and, in turn, send their children to school." That translates into greater access to heavily white neighborhoods with good public schools.

Well, that clears that up. For example, that's why Stuyvesant is about 70% Asian: it's near Wall Street, which is heavily white.
Moreover, even if they attend school with native-born blacks and Latinos, they do not feel a bond of race with native minorities--making them less likely to become part of a peer culture found among some disaffected inner-city black and Latino youth.  

In other words, Asians youths are less likely to join criminal gangs. So, it doesn't have anything to do with culture.
Cubans, meanwhile, are in favor over other Latinos among the new racialists, since they appear to do better in America than groups like Mexicans. But as City University of New York's Philip Kasinitz, an expert on ethnic assimilation, notes, "If Mexicans threw out the top 10% of their population into America, you'd be singing a different tune about Mexicans."

Maybe we should try only taking the top 10% of Mexicans? Speaking of Talented Tenth Mexicans, maybe Alfonso Cuaron would like to direct my screenplay as his Gravity follow-up? I could add some long tracking shots for Lubezki to film. Heck, I could make the plot about the oppression of illegal alien Mexicans in a post-apocalyptic England. What was that movie about, anyway? But I don't care: if Cuaron wants to direct, I'll slap in a maid, gardener, busboy, whatever. I'm cool.
And among Cubans, there's a subset that hasn't done well: the "Marielitos," who immigrated in 1980 when Fidel Castro emptied the island's prisons and told the inmates they were free to head to America. They were much darker in complexion than the first wave of Cubans, and they have not done anywhere near as well as their light-complected compatriots. What does this suggest? First, that if you were doing well in the country you're leaving, you'll do well in the country you're going to, and vice versa. Second, that lighter-skinned people tend to fare better than darker-skinned people when they immigrate to the U.S.,

Or any country ... Except for those damn Tamils. Have you ever noticed how pushy Tamils are? Don't they know their place?
even if they're from the same country.

Here's something I didn't actually know about the Marielitos until I started getting just plain hateful emails after my Time article appeared: a sizable fraction of the Marielitos were career criminals or lunatics emptied out of Cuba's penal institutions by Castro and dispatched on boats as a giant middle finger guffaw at the expense of Castro's archenemy.

I'll grant you that's not common knowledge, but apparently there is this obscure art film called Scarface directed by the exquisitely tasteful Brian De Palma, written by the Oxford professor of history Oliver Stone, and starring an understated character actor named Al Pacino as Tony Montana that obliquely referred to that history:
But how is some Indian like me to supposed to know about obscure American stuff like that? It's racist to expect Indian immigrants to know American history just because we're paid to write long articles in Time Magazine about it. Do you know anything about Indian history? I sure don't. I mean, You sure don't.
What about Jews? Scholars like Stephen Steinberg in The Ethnic Myth have pointed out that the success of immigrant Jews was largely due to the fact that they arrived in the U.S. with "industrial experience and concrete occupational skills" well suited to the booming urban economies of the new world.

That's why so many Jewish-Americans these days have good paying jobs as factory foremen.
Not, as Chua and Rubenfeld posit, because "Jews maintained for millennia the idea that they were God's chosen people."

Well, that clears that up once and for all.
... Lastly, what shall we make of Indians--who, aside from Chinese, are perhaps the new racialists' favorite model minority? Indians in America are, as Chua and Rubenfeld note, "by any number of measures, the most successful Census-tracked ethnic group in the country." 
Well, if Indians are so great, what explains India? The country is a sorry mess, with the largest population of poor, sick and illiterate people in the world, its economy diving, its politics abysmally corrupt. For decades, those who could afford to get out did. The $1,000 that it takes to purchase a one-way ticket to the U.S. is about a year's salary for the average Indian. If India shared a border with the U.S. and it were possible for its poorest residents to cross over on foot, we would fast cease to be the model minority, and talk-show hosts would rail against us just as they do against Mexicans. 

You mean to say that legal restrictions on immigration are actually good for the American public? Maybe we shouldn't take the rest of the world's "huddled masses?" No, I'm just kidding. U-S-A! U-S-A! Statue of Liberty FTW!
The groups Chua and Rubenfeld and the other new racialists typically pick out as success stories are almost without fail examples of self-selection. Forty-two percent of Indians in the U.S. ages 25 and older have a postgraduate degree. But only about 20% of those they've left behind in the motherland even graduate from high school, and 26% of the population is illiterate. It's the same with Nigerians: the ones who are here represent a vastly richer and better-educated subset of the country's population as a whole. 

So Africans really aren't that smart on average? Is that what I'm trying to tell you? No, absolutely not. You should be ashamed of yourself for even thinking that. What kind of racist are you?
Further, the authors pay almost no attention to the role of networking, which accounts for so much of the success of groups like Jews, Cubans and Indians. Part of the reason so many immigrant groups thrive is that when they arrive in the U.S., they already have an uncle who runs a store and cousins who are tutors, doctors or lawyers who can help them negotiate the new country. 
When my family immigrated in 1977, we didn't do well because of delayed gratification or cultural superiority or a chip on our shoulder. We did well because my uncle in Detroit, an engineer, brought us over on the family-reunification bill, not in shackles or in steerage. When my father started his diamond business on 47th Street in Manhattan, there was a network of Indian diamond merchants who could show him the ropes.

Oh, come now, the diamond industry is notoriously meritocratic and wide open to any individual with a little moxie.
My sons, in turn, will benefit from my connections. 
Much of The Triple Package focuses, naturally enough, on immigrants in New York City--then and now the immigrant capital of the country, if not the world. So you could profitably browse a gold mine of a book just put out by the NYC department of city planning, The Newest New Yorkers, a compendium of figures about the diverse groups that make up my hometown. 
Chinese Americans in New York City, it turns out, earn less than other groups lacking the Triple Package. The median household income of Chinese in the city ($42,766) is lower than that of Ecuadoreans ($46,126), Haitians ($48,175) and Pakistanis ($50,912). The New York City group with the highest percentage of high school graduates isn't Chinese or Indians; it's Ukrainians (94.4%). But rarely are we treated to encomiums about the cultural superiority of the Borscht Mom.

Like the Brooklyn Nets are owned by a simple Slavic farm boy who was just better than anybody else at growing potatoes. Or something. I wasn't really paying attention. I leave that to bad people like Amy Chua. Did I mention how much you should hate her?
America's Real Exceptionalism 
The pity is that this book, and this entire line of argument, is taken seriously--among my relatives

Whom I totally disagree with.
Ha-ha-ha
 , for instance, --when all the scholars I've consulted laugh at it. 
"Every one of the premises underlying the theory of the Triple Package is supported by a well-substantiated and relatively uncontroversial body of empirical evidence," the authors assert. "Give me a break," said Foner, who is one of the authorities cited in the endnotes. "There is a large body of literature showing that the most important factor predicting success among the children of immigrants is parents' human capital." That is: skills and education, from family to family and individual to individual. 

And family has nothing to do with culture. Or genes. Neither nurture nor nature matters. Don't even think about children inheriting genes from their parents. No Indian has ever thought about blood ancestry. You can't hear this Indian thinking about biological inheritance. I'm putting my fingers in my ears and chanting so you can't hear me think about that.

Nyah Nyah Nyah.
 

218 comments:

1 – 200 of 218   Newer›   Newest»
Rifleman said...

Take a Pride--Being an Indian. 38% of Doctors in U.S.A. are Indians. 36% of NASA employees are Indians. 34% of MICROSOFT employees are Indians.

How close are those numbers to the truth?

Anonymous said...

I don't even think your run of the mill white liberal could come up with this tripe. The should have re-worked his article after speaking with the lady from the Congo.

Anonymous said...

Jake and Maggie Gyllenhaal are descendants of the Foner famiy. Their mom is Naomi Foner.

Frank Montgomery said...

What's interesting is how Indians are the only race (besides whites, of course) that can be made fun of on primetime television without a single outcry: For the past few weeks I've been watching reruns of "Big Bang Theory" and have been quite interested in how the Indian character Raj in season 7 still can't get with women (with comical exceptions, of course). He's totally the stereotypical indian beta male, while the white betas somehow get girlfriends/wives, but of course they are totally whipped.
There's also a minor character that's a black HR lady-of course the guys are puddy in her wise hands.

Silver said...

Ah for the good ole days when race-denial could be enforced simply by alluding to the specter of Nazi genocide. Mehta really had to sweat here. It's all for naught, though. Resisting the rising tide of racial realism is futile. Race is real and it matters. The question is how best to deal with it, not how best to deny it.

Anonymous said...

More explanations of American history from fuzzy foreigners. Hey Indian guy, why don't you go mud wrestle Amy Chua and stop bothering us?

Anonymous said...

Probable reason that Chinese in NYC aren't showing great results: NYC has a larger fraction of ordinary Chinese vs elite Chinese, brought in by human traffickers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Venture

--Discordiax

Anonymous said...

"I want them to know about the teachers at the Catholic school in Queens who called me a 'pagan,' and the boy there who welcomed me to the school by declaring, 'Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations' . . ."

"Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations" really, really sounds exactly like something a white boy in a Queens Catholic school would have said in the 80s or 90s (which is when I assume this is supposed to have happened). And to a kid from India, since American whites cna't see any difference between blacks and people from India. And a nun in that era calling a kid from India a "pagan" sounds equally plausible.

I call bullshit.

Piraeus said...

Sailer quotes Mehta as writing, "rarely are we treated to encomiums about the cultural superiority of the Borscht Mom."

Sailer replies, "Uh ... Oh never mind ..."

I take it that there is something sort of obvious that Mehta is missing but I'm afraid I'm missing it as well. Can someone explain?

Anonymous said...

"I take it that there is something sort of obvious that Mehta is missing but I'm afraid I'm missing it as well. Can someone explain? "

i'm missing it too.

Silver said...

OT Interesting essay on failures of integration by white leftie Obama campaigner who actually admits he never knew any black people (even though he grew up in the south in the 1980s).

Anonymous said...

Perhaps Steve is alluding to this?

Hunsdon said...

"I, for one, welcome our new Brahmin overlords," said Janet Yellin, never.

Rifleman said...

For the past few weeks I've been watching reruns of "Big Bang Theory" and have been quite interested in how the Indian character Raj in season 7 still can't get with women (with comical exceptions, of course). He's totally the stereotypical indian beta male, while the white betas somehow get girlfriends/wives, but of course they are totally whipped.

None of those TV nerds are betas. They are all omegas.

The betas are the union guys who built the set, work the lighting, the cameras, the service truck guys etc.

If THOSE freaks are the betas then that makes the average guy an alpha, which is ridiculous.

Why do so many guys who frequent the alt-right/Game/PUA/nerosphere constantly shift the definition of beta downward to include emotionally and socially crippled weirdos?

The rest of you are not alphas, not in your wildest video game fantasies.

As for Indian immigrants having the Triple Package, investigate it. Check out the biographies of the successful Indians. Don't just go by one Indian hack fiction writer who was given a chance to restate the clichéd White left/liberal, race baiting point of view on this subject.

Anonymous said...

"I want them to know about the teachers at the Catholic school in Queens who called me a 'pagan,' and the boy there who welcomed me to the school by declaring, 'Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations' . . ."

This is straight out of the Julie Chen playbook (Chen being the tv news reporter who claimed she was pressured into eyelid surgery by her white producer-boss). One need simply recount outrageous and unverifiable oral acts of 'racism' 15+ years after the fact.

I suppose a new meme has been born and that this flavor of anecdote will be on the uptick for the foreseeable future.

Orthodox said...

If I had the kind of money where tossing around a million or two was no thing, I would find that lady from the Congo and run her for Congress.

Silver said...

I call bullshit.

Maybe the incidents he describes are bullshit, but it's not inconceivable that an Indian kid in the 80s would have had some uncomfortable racial moments. There's no point denying that.

What can and should be denied is the Indian's implication that whites now owe him - big time. In fact, whites owe him and every single non-white on earth, and the only way they can even begin make up for it is by surrendering their borders, their cultures, and, most importantly, their entire racial existence.

Bert said...

What the hell is this? Has TIME really been reduced to this?

Oh yeah, and I agree that this is garbage. "Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations"? It's so obviously made up it blows my mind that this was even published.

sunbeam said...

" Sanskrit is the most suitable language for computer software ..."

Is this a thing now? I have never heard this. Any rationale for it?

I once had an acquaintance who knew Latin. It was really weird how he could say whole paragraphs in one short sentence. Guess it is a common meme now, but I kind of think that language shapes your thinking and perceptions (there was a blog entry or two recently here, but I forgot the terminology). And Latin seems more orderly and structured than German, well cooler anyway.

So what is the thinking on Sanskrit and programming? I know nothing about Sanskrit other than it is a pretty old language, only used by Indians, and only to read their religious texts and maybe in ceremonies.

Then there is this:

"Lastly, what shall we make of Indians--who, aside from Chinese, are perhaps the new racialists' favorite model minority? "

Hmmm is this a thing? I kind of think that any Korean, Japanese, heck any of the epicanthic fold crowd is thought of that way.

Not Indians. They are too annoying.

I really know nothing about what Chinese people think or discuss about the topic of race.

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if they thought they were superior to whites, blacks, mexicans, and others.

But they just aren't as obnoxious about it.

Indians are just smug in a way that makes you want to knock their heads off. Christ (cool how I worked that in), they make that Dershowitz guy seem like a mellow, grounded dude.

Potatoes said...

"If Mexicans threw out the top 10% of their population into America, you'd be singing a different tune about Mexicans."

He recognizes how this can impact what people think about Cubans, but seems too dim to recognize the same argument to an even greater extent applies to Indians in America. In this case, its perhaps the top 1% here and their children, who have the means or ability to get here. Of course they will seem bright. Pull some knuckledragging mango farmers from New Delhi here and see how many of them become physicians. Or for that matter, take an average sampling- the average IQ of Indians is much lower than that of US whites.

Anonymous said...

Discordiax,

Poor Chinese immigrants perform just as well academically as their more affluent peers:

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2011/feb/07/chinese-children-school-do-well

Anonymous said...

It always amuses me greatly when Indians, resident in the west, have the gall to pontificate about 'racism', 'discrimination' etc.

The fact is that India is the most racially discriminatory society that has ever been devised in human history, and it has been that way for thousands of years. In India, caste is everything. 'Caste' really is just another term for 'race', only that Indians recognise literally thousands of these endogamous 'micro-races'.
No one asked Ms Mehta to move in on America. That's something she voluntarily chose to do on her whim.
Another point is her moaning at the teachers at her catholic school calling her 'pagan'. Sorry Ms Mehta, catholic schools were set up and run in the first place in order to inculcate children into the catholc faith, believe it or not. The teachers were merely speaking the catholic dogma.

Anonymous said...

Indians and Jews in the diamond business:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/antwerp-s-diamond-business-jews-surrender-gem-trade-to-indians-a-416243.html

Anonymous said...

"Their challenges as a community trace back centuries; they were brought here in chains, their women raped"

They had no civilization to begin with. Blacks put other backs in chains and sold them to other races. For the most part, slave families were kept intact and not broken in the US.
Most slave women were not raped as race mixing was discouraged in US. And black women often willingly slept with white masters cuz women are attracted to power.
Black family was destroyed by welfare and 60s youth culture.
And black men rape women of other races at much higher rates than black women have been raped by others.

Triple package for success in media: victim-hood, moral narcissism, pandering to Jewish elites.

jgress said...

@sunbeam:

I think the comment about Sanskrit and programming refers to the ancient Sanskrit grammar of Panini, which is expressed in a technical language rather similar to modern programming languages, e.g. by eliminating all redundant expressions. There's is nothing about Sanskrit grammar itself which is particularly suitable to programming, any more than, say, English.

Anonymous said...

"No one asked Ms Mehta to move in on America. That's something she voluntarily chose to do on her whim."

The pussy is a he.

Dan said...

I would not be surprised to find that Patel is the most common surname in the operating theatre.

What this chap ignores is that the cognitive and economic elite of India move to the US. In India itself British expats are themselves an economic elite too. The Anglo Indian subset do very very well for themselves too. Nigel Barker from Top Model is a good example. Sebastian Coe is an Anglo-Indian. Admiral Jackie Fisher (built the modern Navy) was probably a half caste Anglo Indian...

You Yanks are lucky you didn't attempt to get Pakis to work in your factories.

Dan said...

America is very nearly at the end of existence.

I have an answer for Ben Franklin. About 200 years and you'll lose it. I have an Answer for Lincoln at Gettysberg, with BRA imposed and the Confederacy beaten, a nation so conceived? I give it until 2008!

Anonymous said...

The curiosity for me is he talks about 'Blacks' but fails to note that in the North East Blacks are mostly immigrants from the 'Great Migration'. Those Great Migration Southern Blacks arrived without Welfare or anything else. They got jobs in US manufacturing, which at the time was the most sophisticated work in the world. Then something happens and the next generation falls apart completely.

Insecurity (paranoia) with a feeling of innate superiority (megalomania) coupled with impulse control (WTF?). Chua claims these are individual traits but in reality the triple package are group traits. Maybe what she is describing is the mysterious Asabiyah of Ibn Khaldun fame.

rec1man said...

@sunbeam,
sunbeam said...
" Sanskrit is the most suitable language for computer software ..."

Is this a thing now? I have never heard this. Any rationale for it?
--

Sanskrit uses the Backus form , which is the foundation of computer languages

rec1man said...

sunbeam said...
" Sanskrit is the most suitable language for computer software ..."

Is this a thing now? I have never heard this. Any rationale for it?
--

Sanskrit uses Backus Form, which is the foundation of Computer Languages

Anonymous said...

Read between the lines and he is a living proof of the trip package.

1. We Indians are special with special insights(even though I pretend to disapprove of my Indian relatives who make a fuss about our success).

2. I am so insecure in a world that is so 'racist' and pressures me to prove my worth.

3. I hit the books and climbed the academic ladder.

---------

But just as classy rich are not supposed to show off their wealth in the manner of boorish nouveau riche, the classy elites are not supposed to notice certain patterns in 'polite society'.

And of course, pander to the official PC of the Jewish elites.

Though Mehta pretends to be rebellious against the power, he is actually slavish to it. America is Jewish-and-liberal-wasp-ruled, and you have to suck up to them to be promoted and favored. The powers-that-be have blacklisted Richwine(who's condemned even by mainstream cons)and Rick Sanchez(who noticed Jewish power), but it favors and shmoozes PC-peddlers like Mehta.

Mehta is the beneficiary of obeying(to the letter) the rules of 'polite society' as enforced by Jewish and liberal wasp elites. His 'anti-racism' has the full approval of the power elites who don't want us to notice their superiority and privilege.
Contrary to Mehta's yammering, people like Richwine are outed and destroyed, and Mehta is being used as a hired gun by the elites to attack Chua who noticed differences in wealth and power.

Btw, 'leftism' is premised on noticing differences too--1% vs the 99%, 'white privilege', class inequality, etc--but the reasons it puts forth are always 'racism' and some other 'ism'. Lately though, 'gay' stuff is favored to distract from other differences that indicate Jews and their lib urban allies are best off and most privileged.

Chua and Sowell's sin is that theyy think 'racism' doesn't explain all--and that racial feelings are not limited to whites(who lately have become the most deracinated people).

Indians slavishly played running dog to the Brits for 200 yrs. Before that, they were slavish running dogs to Moghuls. Mehta is part of that tradition. He's such a good running dog to the new elites of the US. Everything he says is such a cliche not only favored but enforced by the pc police. Would TIME ever invite Sailer or Richwine to write a review or opinion piece? No, but it sure rolled out the red carpet for a well-trained running dog like Mehta. Woof.

rec1man said...

Rifleman said...
Take a Pride--Being an Indian. 38% of Doctors in U.S.A. are Indians. 36% of NASA employees are Indians. 34% of MICROSOFT employees are Indians.

How close are those numbers to the truth?

--

Not true, divide the numbers by 3 or 4

This junk email is spammed by stupid mid caste Indians, who dont show up on those lists

rec1man said...

Indian performance in UK is highly caste dependent

Patels and Sikhs who form 35% of US Indians, win about 2% of the Indian National Merit winners

However they are good in business and blue collar work and are rich

Caribbean Indians who are another 10% of US Indians win about 0% of Indian National Merit Semifinalists

Indians dont join gangs, dont get pre-marital babies and are very thrifty and willing to share housing with extended family. This means each household gets enough money, having many members earning lower salaries

rec1man said...

Mehta can be Gujurati Jain or Gujurati brahmin

In this case he is certainly Jain, since his family is in diamond business

Gene Berman said...

Sunbeam:

Listening to a discussion among several men (one a college-educated Korean) as to which race (white, black, yellow) was the most biologically advanced, the Korean insisted that asians were No. 1: they'd evolved a fold of skin to protect the eye from reflected glare and, likewise, a covering of skin on the penis to protect the sensitive glans.

Cail Corishev said...

Great MSTing, Steve.

"Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations" really, really sounds exactly like something a white boy in a Queens Catholic school would have said in the 80s or 90s (which is when I assume this is supposed to have happened). And to a kid from India, since American whites can't see any difference between blacks and people from India. And a nun in that era calling a kid from India a "pagan" sounds equally plausible.

Yeah, by the 1980s, Catholic teaching sisters were fully liberal -- if anything, they were leading the charge for things like multiculturalism. Yes, it's possible there could have been one 70-year-old sister still hanging around a school, wearing her habit, expressing "out-of-date" beliefs. But he says "teachers," plural, called him a pagan. Probably what happened is he was in religion class and they got to the chapter on paganism and there was his religion, then he saw The Blues Brothers and put it all together to form this traumatic "memory."

And as a white, former Catholic schoolboy, I can assure him that white, Catholic schoolboys say and do plenty of cruel things to each other that have nothing to do with race. If that "Lincoln" crack was the worst he got, he should relax and consider himself lucky.

Besides, consider what he's admitting here: after travelling halfway around the world, he was able to attend a private parochial school belonging to a religious organization he wasn't a member of. Where else can that happen? And the worst thing that happened was he might have heard some unkind things about his heritage. Big freakin' deal. His parents could have sent him to a high-quality private Hindu school -- oh wait, those didn't exist, because only the Catholics had gone to the expense and trouble to create such schools and then invite "pagans" like him to attend them. The racists.

Socially Extinct said...

Haha, Sunbeam, I hate to burst your epithelial bubble, but Chinese are some of the most annoying model minority types in the world. I'm presuming you're speaking of "annoying" in the sense it is difficult to relate to and exist with a particular group on a daily basis. Chinese have zero requirement for personal space, they are rude, and drive shopping carts with the expertise of someone 50 IQ points their junior.

Koreans are cool but they always smell like cigarettes and Kimchi.

Nah, the true model minority are the Japanese. They are chill and Americanized through and through.

Dan said...

Indians are a little bit like Brits in that they don't mind being clowns and they don't mind being villains when they act. They have a reasonable self assurance.

Anonymous said...

"The median household income of Chinese in the city ($42,766) is lower than that of Ecuadoreans ($46,126), Haitians ($48,175) and Pakistanis ($50,912)."

Chinese illegals work for Chinese shops that pay poorly. But I'll bet the children of those poor Chinese will do better than the children of better off Ecuadorians and Haitians.
I'll also bet Ecuadorians and Haitians in NY tend to be from more privileged backgrounds than the average Chinese in NY.

Also, it could be lots of Chinese run businesses and small businesses tend to under-report their income.

Mr. Anon said...

"Rifleman said...

""Take a Pride--Being an Indian. 38% of Doctors in U.S.A. are Indians. 36% of NASA employees are Indians. 34% of MICROSOFT employees are Indians.""

How close are those numbers to the truth?"

I don't know about the other two, but this one: "36% of NASA employees are Indians." is utter bulls**t. I guess this is one of the fairy-tales that high-caste Indians tell themselves.

Anonymous said...

"If India shared a border with the U.S. and it were possible for its poorest residents to cross over on foot, we would fast cease to be the model minority, and talk-show hosts would rail against us just as they do against Mexicans."

Well, that is something to be grateful for, that the USA does not share a land border with India.

Anonymous said...

MMMM, this might be the most unintentionally (?) anti-mass immigration article that I have ever read in an MSM outlet like TIME. I mean, look at how Mehta constantly points out the benefits of only allowing the top 10% in. How did something like this sneak by?

syon

Mr. Anon said...

"Bert said...

Oh yeah, and I agree that this is garbage. "Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations"? It's so obviously made up it blows my mind that this was even published."

This is TIME magazine we're talking about. They were never anything more than than a Reader's Digest-like compendium of insipid cliches penned by talentless, hack-journalists. Actually, even Reader's Digest was better than TIME. The only publication not worse than TIME was Newsweek, which was the same thing, really.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Indus ... when one aggressive, insular, high-g ethnic minority with a permanent chip on its shoulder isn't enough.

peterike said...

I've noticed that certain sorts of Indians, especially the women, are really good at aping all the right Progressive shibboleths. It's almost like they looked at the major power group in America and said,"Hmmm, what do those people promote politically?"

Like most Asians, Indians aren't terribly creative or original, but the ones who aren't drudges are fiercely good at pole climbing (the Chinese, not so much). Of course, it helps to be a shameless backstabbing liar.

I wonder about these Indian uber-Liberals. Do they really believe the twaddle they spout? Especially coming from a culture that is completely nativist, as she admits herself. Did she really shake off all of grandpa's "Indians are the best!" rhetoric? Or is she just playing the game, thinking to herself, "See how smart we Indians are? We can even fool the Jews. Now where's my tenure?"

Mr. Anon said...

So when actual real Americans, like Madison Grant or Samuel Huntington or Thomas Sowell, have opinions about the characteristics of different ethnic groups and the influence of those characteristics on American society - that's just racism. But when Mr. Mehta has an opinion on the matter, we should all stand up and take notice. We never should have let this little twit into our country in the first place.

Anonymous said...

I believe the statistic that 38% of doctors are Indian. But you won't find them practicing at Mt Sinai or Mass General. The disproportionately make up the network of quacks who treat the nations destitute, elderly, or mentally ill and pad their charges to Medicaid and Medicare. Of all the easy jobs out there sitting in your Sari or your turbin and passing out prescriptions for Adderal and Thorazine to patients you have nothing but contempt for has gotta be the easiest. Then you go home to your live in slave and flog them for exercise if you're too cheap to buy a 24 hr fitness center membership.

Anonymous said...

http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/2014/02/race-relations-massive-liberal-failure.html

josh said...

Actually, the characters on the Big Bang Theory are pretend. I hope that clears up any confusion.

Chicago said...

Pretty neat trick, rolling around in his own high-horse Indian version of waycissm while denouncing it as he perceives it to exist in others. That's gratitude for you, biting the hand that's been feeding him. People like this are called 'grievance collectors'. They'll recount every example of being insulted in their entire life going all the way back to childhood as though they're human tape recorders (the time some person insulted me at the grocery store in 1978, etc etc). Other groups such as blacks are quite good at that also.
Where does the name Mehta place him? Is he a fire-worshipper?

Anonymous said...

Whites are the only one who care about the country, everyone else is in it for their self, family, or group. Time for whites to join in.

ysv_rao said...


How close are those numbers to the truth?"

They are tripe. Nasa is 9% at the most. Don't know about Micrsoft. Possibly higher than 9% but now way 34%

Indian media is notorious for promoting these bogus numbers in a mania of hyper jingoism

But if you read the comments section in popular Indian news sites such as rediff.com and Times of India you will find the posters to be quite skeptical or at best indifferent to such claims

@Frank Montgomery
Indians and Asian get the short end of the stick in popular culture as they are not as dyed in the wool Americans as minorities such as blacks or Hispanics who have been part of American history for nearly 400 years

@Silver many of the racial incidents against Indians may not have been instigated by those blasted WASPs
I always assumed that the Dotbusters were a second coming of Knownothing Gangs of New York type Anglos but then I checked the Wikipedia page of who comprised the group-
Luis Acevedo, Ralph Gonzalez,William Acevedo and Luis Padilla

Oh

And the guy they ended up killing was not Hindu but Parsi

@Anon 5:39
Please stop talking nonsense.
Caste<>race by any stretch of the imagination

If you are referring to Brahmins being fairer skinned than other South Indians then its due to migration of Kashmiris and UP Brahmins to the South due to various factors- usually Hun and Muslim invasions
And Brahmins aren't the only fair skinned people in the South.
Reddys,Nairs,Tuluvas,Kammas,Pillais, who often are quite non Brahminical in their diet and outlook.
Rama, Krishna,Draupadi among other royal figures now part of Hindu mythology were described as rather dark skinned and they had impeccable "Aryan" ancestry

As late as the 7th century if you notice the cave paintings in Ajanta and Ellora you would notice royal figures as often more dark skinned than their servants.

Whether or not you believe in Aryan Invasion Theory,it is now dismissed as a basis for the caste system


Furthermore Greek and Chinese travelers to ancient India noticed that that Indian society was quite fluid when it came to upward mobility.


The blood basis for the caste system came from the invasion of Huns and West Asians such as Persians and Arabs. Blood is quite a big deal for them. Less so for Indians
Even now notice how Iraqis prohibit Americans from adopting orphans as due to their obsession with blood purity adoption is a taboo

Even today in India, no one expects Brahmins who identify themselves by descent of seven sages( or gotra) but it is understood they carry forward rituals and traditions associated with that particular sage

and btw Steve, Suketu is certainly NOT a Hindu nationalist.

A Gujarati from Mumbai tends to associate Hindu nationalism with Maratha parochialism who are hostile to Gujaratis historically and hence are suspicious

Gujaratis are more comfortable with homegrown less martial Hindu nationalism of their native Gujarat which is more to do with libertarian economics and self reliance anti Muslim feeling with a dash of. Narendra Modi, probably next Indian PM, is the best example of this type

Suketa Mehta, a cosmopolitan secularist typical of Indian intelligentsia, belongs to neither category

Many Gujaratis are descended from White Huns (Hephtalites) and named for them (Gujjar tribesmen)

THe descendents of Huns and Scythians tend to be the most notorious practitioners of the caste system even tothis day.


Anonymous said...

Brooklyn Nets are owned by a simple Slavic farm

Prokhorov is a real mongrel - he is Russian-Daghestani-Jewish

Anonymous said...

The average IQ of India is only 82.

Indians in USA result of selective immigration.

Anonymous said...

" Stuyvesant is about 70% Asian: it's near Wall Street, which is heavily white."

Stuyvesant is within walking distance of Manhattan China Town, which these days is just one of many China/Korea towns in the city. The subway connects Stuyvesant to many of the China/Korea towns in Queens conveniently.

A question I have is what happened to Jews in NYC? Actually upscale Whites from everywhere else in the US seem to be filling the niche and real estate once occupied by Woody Allen's parents.

Anonymous said...

Another recipe for success, whether you want to make money or would rather bake artisinal cupcakes in Williamsburg because it is more "authentic."

Anonymous said...

We had one Indian boy in our Catholic grade school in the 70s. No one called him a pagan, though I'm sure many hoped his family would convert (imagine the gall, Catholics actually believing their faith.) Ironically, his family is Parsi and Zoroastrian, his father a doctor and he a successful computer engineer. You will never meet a better guy.

On another note, why are two tenured professors at arguably the best law school in the country writing about this topic? Don't get me wrong, I find it as interesting as the next iSteve follower (and ironically can vouch for it's veracity, as a Lebanese-American). However, tenured professors, especially at the best law schools, usually write on such thrilling subjects as the negative commerce clause and pendent jurisdiction.

Steve from Detroit

Rohan Swee said...

Well, if Indians are so great, what explains India? The country is a sorry mess, with the largest population of poor, sick and illiterate people in the world, its economy diving, its politics abysmally corrupt. For decades, those who could afford to get out did. The $1,000 that it takes to purchase a one-way ticket to the U.S...

I guess the author should be grateful that his relatives first started coming over after the 1965 immigration act had started transforming the U.S. from a majority-white racist loser nation. Otherwise this country would still have been such a cesspit of wall-to-wall culturally-impoverished Anglos that they may as well have just stayed in India.

In other words, notice how these immigrant groups disputing about "cultural capital" this and ethnic that amongst themselves, never once give any credit (or gratitude) to the superior cultural capital of the countries to which they prefer to migrate? Instead, people like the author talk about "WASPS" (or the equivalent in European countries) as if they were all that was holding the country back.

Nobody quite as racially resentful as the anti-racialist.

Part of this is no doubt "immigrant narcissism". ("This country was nothing until we showed up!"). But I wonder if there isn't a bit of whistling past the graveyard in there, too. Mehta is acknowledging here that the magical transforming cultural capital of wonderful superior people like him didn't (and can't) fix his native land, and at some level he must know that a culture of personal virtues unconnected to an inherited culture of civic virtues does not a First World nation make. Best replace those uncomfortable considerations with phoney-baloney natterings about solidarity with blacks and Hispanics.

Or maybe he really is all about racial resentment and just not getting what all those racists and culture-ists are talking about. He writes:

When my family immigrated in 1977, we didn't do well because of delayed gratification or cultural superiority or a chip on our shoulder. We did well because my uncle in Detroit, an engineer, brought us over on the family-reunification bill, not in shackles or in steerage...

I don't think the difference between immigrants like Mehta's family and immigrants like my paternal ancestors is that the latter came over in steerage. The fact that they got out of steerage and into the professional middle-class in a generation indicates that they had what it took, whatever the Chuas or Mehtas think "it" may be. (Btw, is Mehta under the impression that Eastern European Jews of the last great wave sailed in first class?)

No, the real difference is that, by prevailing cultural pressure but also by choice, they took the Anglo-Saxon civic culture, and American history, as their own. In a word, they became patriots A sentimental priority, I suppose, to Mr. Mehta. What is the patrimony of Anglo-America compared to the vast treasures of resentment stored up from being called a "pagan" by a knucklehead? ("Pagan"? That was their best shot? Man, ethnic and racial taunts sure have gotten genteel since my grandpa's day.)

Anonymous said...

"I also want them to know why their family did well in the end. We worked hard, yes, and we read books and went to the right schools and are "well settled," as our relatives back in India describe us. But we also benefited from numerous advantages--from cultural capital built up over generations to affirmative action to an established network of connections in our new country--none of which had anything to do with racial, ethnic or cultural superiority."

And from a country which, overwhelmingly, did not discriminate against you because of your race.

I've been observing Indians for two decades now, ever since one of my best friends in high school was Indian. Observation 1: they are the most ethnocentric group you will ever, ever meet. They spend a lot of time hanging out just with each other and excluding others. At my gym, at the park, at graduation parties and wedding receptions - Indians are better at excluding those not of their race than any group I can think of. This is especially impressive since my city, like most American cities, doesn't have an especially large population of Indians. Observation 2: "white flight" is nothing compared to Indian flight. Indians stay away from the vibrant parts of town to a far greater degree than whites, even if that means renting. Observation 3: Indians go for status symbols. What else would explain their success WRT spelling bees, which are quite possibly the most pointless competitions known to man. Perhaps part of why they win is due to superior memories, but partly it's because the vast majority of whites, appropriately, write off spelling bees as a huge waste of time.

All this is not to denigrate all of Indian culture. Much of it focuses on avoidance of prole white culture, which more Americans would due well to avoid. It's just that a country run by Indians would be far more racist than the one Mr. Mehta hhappened to be raised in. If we look around the world I bet we can find one.

e: Steve's reference to Ukrainians - their impressive academic performance is because most Ukrainians in the US aren't esp especially unrepresentative of the Ukrainians back home, because most "Ukrainians" here are Jews.

Anonymous said...

All I can say is: Bobby Jindal for (First Indian) President!

Anonymous said...

"Another point is her moaning at the teachers at her catholic school calling her 'pagan'. Sorry Ms Mehta, catholic schools were set up and run in the first place in order to inculcate children into the catholc faith, believe it or not."

Modern America: you have the right to take advantage of a superior education system set up by a religion of which you are not a member, and have no obligation to be grateful for it, and they have no right to point out that you are not of their faith.

Anonymous said...

Funny how "the right schools" includes the one in Queens where the teachers called him a pagan.

Simon in London said...

Sometimes I think Indian leftists are the most annoying leftists of all. There's a real nails-on-the-chalkboard quality about them.

Simon in London said...

>>Frank Montgomery said...
What's interesting is how Indians are the only race (besides whites, of course) that can be made fun of on primetime television without a single outcry: For the past few weeks I've been watching reruns of "Big Bang Theory" and have been quite interested in how the Indian character Raj in season 7 still can't get with women (with comical exceptions, of course). He's totally the stereotypical indian beta male, while the white betas somehow get girlfriends/wives, but of course they are totally whipped.<<

Seems pretty accurate to me - of course white nerds don't get blonde babe girlfriends IRL unless they're billionaires, but if they have high paid jobs as on BBT they typically get girlfriends of some sort. Indian male nerds probably don't get white girlfriends, but they can always go home, and their parents will arrange someone suitable.

Rohan Swee said...

"Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations" really, really sounds exactly like something a white boy in a Queens Catholic school would have said in the 80s or 90s (which is when I assume this is supposed to have happened). And to a kid from India, since American whites cna't see any difference between blacks and people from India. And a nun in that era calling a kid from India a "pagan" sounds equally plausible.

I call bullshit.


You're right, anonymous. I was naïve not to take all this with a grain of salt. It's possible some white American could mistake a very dark Indian for an American black, but since everybody in the world commits the alleged mortal sin of not being able to distinguish unfamiliar people one from the other, I'm not sure what the grievance is here. Surely an Indian would not be offended at the implication that he was as dark as an African? Nah, couldn't be. Doubtless it was just an indignant empathy on behalf of American blacks.

As you say, it's unlikely that any '80s nun was calling anybody not from the first centuries A.D. a "pagan". And any way, "pagan", depending on context, is no more or less pejorative than anybody else's term for "those other guys" or "non-believers". I wouldn't bet that Mehta grew up without acquiring equivalent words (though I'm sure he scrupulously refrains from ever employing them in any circumstances).

Yeah, it's all about as plausible as Angelo Mozilo's being asked to sit in the back of the bus in Orlando.

Richard Brown said...

The recent footage of jubilant Nasa scientists was melanin free.

India does have a very long, very brilliant intellectual tradition though.

Miguel S. said...

One might argue that immigration is a trade-off: we get some smart Indians and Chinese in return for some dumb Mexicans. But I don't want to live in country with a lot of foreigners! I think all normal acculturated Americans (whites and blacks) really understand that.

Yesterday, a lady who was talking to me asked "Do you have something against Mexicans?" I said (somewhat disingenuously), "Well, I didn't grow up with them, and we tend to like what we're more familiar with." She seemed to understand that; I think most people do.

Anonymous said...

Hindians need to go easy on the curry. They are winning the smelling bee.

Anonymous said...

/* The fact is that India is the most racially discriminatory society that has ever been devised in human history, and it has been that way for thousands of years. */

Ignorant rant..

Nothing has been as dangerous to the different peoples of the world as the racism of the Christian Whites. Wherever they went they've decimated the native traditions & cultures not to speak of torturing and murdering those who resist. To top it all, they have the temerity to accuse others of being racist and justify their sins by saying "others do not even have a civilization of their own."

Here is how the White Christians tried to decimate the high culture of Hindus: ""Eyelids were sliced off and extremities were amputated carefully, a person could remain conscious even though the only thing that remained was his torso and head.
Daughters raped and sons killed in front of their parents and parents couldn’t even close eyes since eyelids were sliced.
Huts were burnt of those converts who would resort back to worshiping ways of their fathers."

Richard Brown said...

Take a Pride--Being an Indian. 38% of Doctors in U.S.A. are Indians. 36% of NASA employees are Indians. 34% of MICROSOFT employees are Indians.


The recent footage of jubilant NASA scientists was an all white affair.

India does have a very long intellectual history, though.

Anonymous said...

Mehta is right to some extent. Since 'racism' is a no-no, there are roundabout occam-butter-knife ways of discussing inequalities.

But he's a dishonest prick cuz he takes it as an article of faith that racial issues must not be discussed.

So, I agree with him to the extent that many social scientists are being dishonest or disingenuous in talking around race when their views have racial implications.

But then, why are so many social scientists/academics/critics so cowardly about the taboo subject of race? It's because they will be blacklisted and destroyed by 'polite society'. Though elites act 'polite', they are intolerant and ruthless toward those who undermine proper forms--and in this they are like the British upper crust who acted so polite and hoity toity but ruthlessly shunned and excluded those without proper forms and manners.
It's just that the forms and manners have changed in our new elite society. Now, it's discussion of racial differences that is no-no even though the makeup of elite society reflects the differences.
And Mehta, as much as he yammers about equality, is very much the voice of this new elite that gains most wealth and power but puts on 'progressive' airs of 'polite' society.

Polite-ical correctness is bogus.

Truth is never polite. Truth is noticing that someone blew a nasty Hindu fart in the elevator. And I will say it.

Paradox of new elites. To enter the exclusive world, you have to speak inclusivity.
The new country club rules: you must be very smart and rich but you must deny race or culture has anything to do with your riches.

Anonymous said...

Mehta has anecdotes about how some whites dissed him.

But what about accounts of Americans who were treated like shit by rude Indian-Americans?

What about crooked Hindian businessmen who fleeced us?

And what about all those Indian-Americans robbed and beaten or murdered by blacks? I'll bet many more Hindians were whupped by blacks than by whites, but Mehta doesn't wanna go there.

He knows that's not what the Jewish and Lib Wasp elites wanna hear. Jews and Lib Wasps live in their own world but they wanna act like they CARE SO MUCH, so they roll out to the red carpet for the likes of Mehta who whines about 'evil white cons', but I'll bet the 'whites' who turned off the electricity in his place were likely Democratic Jews.

Btw, I dare Mehta to write a piece denouncing Jewish-Zionist hypocrisy when it comes to the oppression of Palestinians. Coward hasn't got the guts.

Anthony said...

How many hundreds of words to demonstrate that Amy Chua is right about Indians and insecurity?

Anonymous said...

Indian "American" from India demanding that Native Born White Americans commit demographic suicide.

Bill Blizzard and his Men

Anonymous said...

"It always amuses me greatly when Indians, resident in the west, have the gall to pontificate about 'racism', 'discrimination' etc.
The fact is that India is the most racially discriminatory society that has ever been devised in human history, and it has been that way for thousands of years. In India, caste is everything. 'Caste' really is just another term for 'race', only that Indians recognise literally thousands of these endogamous 'micro-races'."

Well, Meathead does admit that Hindians are very 'racist' and etc, and he does credit American history as moving toward greater equality.

Even so, there are two different rules for immigrants in America. No matter how messed up, cruel, ugly, odious, noxious, and etc. your native history/culture, all your sins are washed away when you come to America if you're 'non-white'. (It's like Ace Rothstein says all the sins of gangsters were supposed to be washed clean in Las Vegas). So, never mind the bloody histories of China, India, Africa, Turks, Jews, Conquistador-Americans, etc, etc. The minute they arrive in America, their sins are washed clean and they are 'people of color', victims of 'white racists'. Never mind they have their own histories of conquest, mass rape, plunder, genocide, democide, slave trade, bigotry, extremism, and etc. (To be sure, this applies less to Muslims since Zionists want all Americans to feel hostility toward Muslims who are potentially enemies of Israel. If not for Israel, most Jews would be pushing the "muslim as the new Jewish victims of white 'racism'" trope.

BUT, rules are different from white immigrants(excluding white conquistdor-americans and Jews). No matter how tragic their own history, they must take on the 'original sin' of white American 'racism', and they are labeled with 'white privilege'. So, never mind the sad histories of Poland, Greece, much of the Balkans, Ukraine, Lithuania, and etc in the past centuries. Or never mind that Swedes, Finns, Norwegians never took part in global imperialism. They are all tagged with the 'original sin' of American 'white racism'.

So, Swedish-Americans and Lithuanian-Americans have to defer morally to Hindu-Americans, African-immigrants, and white conquistador Americans who conquered and raped Latin America.
Norwegian-Americans have to feel sorry for billionaire Jews who are associated with forever-victim-hood-of-Holocaust(as well as golfocaust).

Anonymous said...

We're probably drawing from a more exclusive sample of Indians than the top 10%. The top 3% of Indians equates to 40 million people. Sending 2 million to the US wouldn't be a problem. There are about 3-4 million Indian-Americans, probably about half of them born here. Indian-Americans could easily come from mainly from the India's 97th percentile.

Indians comprise about 1/6th of the world's population, yet their impact on science and culture, while certainly not negligible, isn't remotely proportional to their numbers.

In fact, it would seem, contrary to popular belief, that as countries get too large, diverse, and overcrowded (see India and China) their impact on culture wanes.

Anonymous said...

If you're a 'non-white' immigrant, you are baptized with water and forgiven all your past sins.

If you're a white immigrant, you are smeared with the blood of America's 'original sin'.

Btw, since American Indians practiced genocide, slavery, male warrior chauvinism, burning down entire forests, and etc., shouldn't they be credited with the 'original sin'?
But the narrative says Indians lived in Eden and the white Adam and Eve ate the first evil apple.

I suppose the logic of this is associated with the concept of KNOWLEDGE. Before Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Knowledge, they didn't know good from evil. They were innocent. But once they ate the fruit, they understood higher knowledge and could tell good from evil.

Similarly, the moral logic seems to argue that non-whites who practiced slavery, genocide, conquest, imperialism, and etc were 'innocent' since they didn't know of the notion of 'good and evil'. Just like we can't blame animals and children cuz they don't know any better, we shouldn't blame Indians and Africans cuz they didn't know any better when they practiced slavery and imperialism.

But as whites gained the Moral Knowledge of good and evil, their violent deeds were indeed 'evil' since they knew better and should have known better. Blacks and Indians didn't know that slavery was bad, but whites did. So, what whites did was a sin than just a violent deed.

It's like Adam and Eve, having gained the knowledge from the Tree, could understand good from evil and vice versa. So, they could be judged.

But this logic seems to argue that whites and only whites had the mental and cultural means to gain higher knowledge of good and evil whereas other cultures/races didn't. So, isn't the idea of 'original sin' of white folks a kind of white supremacism too?



Anonymous said...

Mehta vs Chua. India vs China.

Indian elites, having been acclimatized to western elites for much longer, are more adept at playing to white elite tastes and conceits.

Though Mehta seems anti-white-privilege, such is the officially sanctioned position of the current western world. Privileged whites favor non-white elites who bitch about 'white privilege'. White elites like to pride themselves in being inclusive by embracing anti-white-privilege non-white elites, but as two elite groups grow closer together, they boost one another's privilege while dumping all the blame on southern hillbillies.

Anonymous said...

India is a paradox upon paradox, contradiction upon contradiction, a mess upon mess. It's a place where the holiest of rivers, the Ganges, is allowed to fester as an open sewage. Purity and putrefaction, truth and lies, tradition and modernity, etc and etc are never far apart.

With its caste system, India has been one of the most racially purist societies that ever existed. But over 1000s of yrs, lots of race mixing did happen. So, the caste system is like mestizo-Nazism. Ridiculous.

Indian spirituality has been among the most tolerant and open(with its many gods, often borrowed from other cultures), but it's also the most rigid and restrictive. You have a karma and you better stick to it cuz if you mess with it, you'll be reincarnated as a rat. Look at the priest in DHARM who is a freak about 'impurities'.

More than most Third World nations, India became closely incorporated with the West. Brits, the top imperialists in the world, prized India as the Jewel in the Crown. And many Indian elites studied in the West and took on Western norms. But there's so much about India that is so messy, backward, superstitious, particularist, tribal, and exotic(even to Indians themselves)that it's among the least westernized third world nations. In Japan, Korea, and increasingly China, modernity seems to be spreading uniformly all across, but India has huge divides between ultra-modern city centers and villages that still seem to stuck in ancient or even pre-historic times. This makes India both the most open and the most closed among the non-western nations.

Indians, being garrulous, can also be among the most forthright and honest folks. But as being Indian has always meant negotiating across various ethnicities and castes and cultures, so much of endless Indian yammering is an art of BS. Diversity rarely fosters honesty. Hindus may be good spellers, but they cannot spell 'truth'. But they talk so much, you'd think they wanna be forthright and speak the truth.
This Meathead guy yammers so much but he's so full of shit.

Indians are also among the most slavish and most assertive, and again, we see this in Meathead. He acts like he's a big talker with big balls, but he's just playing toady to the new elites. Lib elites are patting him on the head as a 'good boy'.

PC Makes You Stupid said...

Oy vey! When you drop a nugget like the Foner family into the mix it queers your whole sarcastic schtick.

Anonymous said...

Anglo-Americans raped black women?

Sure, it happened, but when measured against the history of rape, the American way was to remain sexually separate. Now, Latin-Americans raped tons of natives, and that resulted in the mestizos.
Mongols raped lots of everyone they can get their hands on. So, we see Mongol traits, however faint, in Persians, Chinese, Turks, etc.
Russians were also massive rapists during WWII. Rape of Germany, now that was horrifically epic, indeed part of unspoken soviet policy.

Indian castes were created through massive rape by so many invaders through the ages.
Turks raped Greeks. Germanic barbarians and Huns raped Romans, and Romans did a lot of raping. African tribes conquered one another endlessly and raped one another. Same with American Indians. So, rape was nothing special in historical terms. It was as common as war, slavery, conquest, etc. Rape was war by other means, and war was common in the pre-modern world.

So, yes, white Americans did rape some black women, but American history of slavery generally restrained such behavior. When Germanic barbarians sacked Rome, they raped every women they can get their hands on. Mongols did the same in China, Persia, and Russia. Russians did as much in Germany. Turks did the same during the fall of Constantinople, a rape fest. Moors raped like crazy in Europe. And Spanish policy was to have sex with native women and produce the mestizo. Usually, it was white men and native women. And in India, the winning side often raped the losing side.

If white Americans had been as much into rape as Latinos and the invaders of India, American races would have been far more mixed. Most Americans would be mulattos or mestizos or some such from endless rape. The fact that the races remained mostly separate and distinct meant that whites generally didn't pursue rape as a policy. Generally, white slave owners tries to foster family life among slaves. They didn't take to black women like elites in India over millennia raped conquered women or like Latin Conquistador whites sexually conquered native women.

Meathead's mixed race blood is the result of millennia of rape that was the part of Indian history. If anything, rape was less the feature of American history.

Btw, Germans were massively raped by Russians after WWII, but Germany is doing a hell of lot better than Russia.

And in America, blacks rape whites, Asians, and Hispanics, but whites and Asians do better than blacks.

Anonymous said...

The fact that white americans came with their women ensured less rape and race-mixing. In contrast, most Hispanic and Portuguese settlers in the New World were men, and they set their sights on native or African women.

Similarly, Dutch settlers in South Africa brought women with them, and that ensured less sexual contact between whites and blacks. Racial separatism protected black women from sexual conquest.

Same with Zionism. It was pursued by Jewish men and women who came to Palestine together. If Zionism only brought Jewish men, many of them would have sexually conquered native women.

Racial separatism had a way of reducing interracial rape.

ysv_rao said...

oops I mistakenly got the impression that Steve thought that Suketu Mehta may be a Hindu nationalist and I corrected him on that. Obviously none was needed.. Apologies

As for the Sanskrit being the most suitable for programming thing- it sounds like nonsense because if it were there would be some great programs using Sanskrit clauses and whatnot

Programming languages capability have little to do with the languages in which they are written but how close they are to assembly code while being as user friendly at the same time. To think otherwise is silliness

I think the confusion arises from Sanskrit corpus containing a lot of treatise on logic which is well regarded by scholars worldwide.

Some nationalist and perhaps a Western Indophile interpolated this as Sanskrit as the prototype for an uber programming language and hence the confusion

Gunnar von Cowtown said...

In other words, the most important family memories that my sons are having inculcated in them is that they are Victims of Whites. That's the most important legacy to instruct your children in in the 21st Century.

I've said this before, but it bears repeating. Steve's latent mean streak is a thing of beauty.

ysv_rao said...


Or any country ... Have you ever noticed how pushy Tamils are? Don't they know their place?"

I am not Tamil but my ethnic group is related to theirs as say the Scots to the Irish. Trust me they ARE pushy. Even other South Indians dislike them for their cultural imperialism, demographic aggression,self righteousness and arrogance.

And those are the Indian Tamils. Less said about the psychotic SL Tamils the better. Even Indian Tamils didn't want anything to do with them and promptly evicted most SL Tamil "refugees" in the 80s after a crime epidemic

jody said...

a separate post about the new CEO of microsoft, and what it could mean, is probably in order steve.

Gubbler of the Society of Reformed Chechenistics said...

There's a funny paradoxical nature to this thing called 'egalitarianism'. It's sold as a form of anti-supremacism, but it's really a democratized version of supremacism.
It's like Lena Dunham is the democratization of narcissism. It's narcissism of the ugly-as-attractive.

Most people are not superior in anything: sports, arts, wit, intelligence, skills, etc. Most are mediocre. And lots of people are just plain dumb.

If supremacism is about delusions of grandeur of being better than others, egalitarianism is supremacism for the average schmuck and those dumber than him. It fills them with delusions of grandeur.

Egalitarianism makes a lot of people feel superior to their true worth.
Suppose someone is ugly, lazy, and have an IQ of 80. Under 'egalitarianism', he is told he is equal to beautiful, smart, and talented people. He is made to feel superior than his real self which is a dumb, ugly, and untalented moron.

Nazism filled Germans with delusions of grandeur. Though most Germans were average folks, they were made to feel a lot more superior than they really were. They were made to feel delusions of grandeur of being smarter than Jews, faster than blacks, and etc. Thus, supremacism was a myth, especially when applied collectively. After all, there were plenty of ugly, slow, and dumb Germans--and there were plenty of Jews who were smarter than Germans and plenty of blacks who were faster/stronger than Germans.

So, we've been told that supremacism is bad and egalitarianism is good. But egalitarianism also fills a lot of people with delusions of being superior to their real selves. If a dumb person is told he is equal to Einstein, he is made to feel superior to his actual dumb self. If a weakling is told he is equal with Muhammad Ali, he is made to feel superior to his actual weakling self.

While egalitarianism may undervalue the superiority of genuinely smarter people, it overvalues the ability of dumb people. Dumb people are made to feel superior to their actual selves that are pretty dumb.
Thus, egalitarianism has the effect of spreading supremacist mentality among the masses. It fills even dummies with self-esteem, which is over-evaluation of one's actual talent which is meager.

The other effect of egalitarianism is as an opiate. Though sold as anti-elitism, it can actually be cleverly used by the elites to pacify the masses. If the masses are injected with the opiate that they have equal worth and that they live in a world that is dedicated to equality, they are less likely to rebel. US is said to be all about equality, and the enlightened elites make so much noise through the media that they working ever so harder to pave the way for a more equal future.
You see, SOMETHING is being done, like pre-k education. So, just have faith in the 'egalitarian' transformation.

Thus, egalitarianism becomes an opiate for the masses. It pacifies than militarizes them.

ysv_rao said...


"Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations" really, really sounds exactly like something a white boy in a Queens Catholic school would have said in the 80s or 90s (which is when I assume this is supposed to have happened). And to a kid from India, since American whites cna't see any difference between blacks and people from India. And a nun in that era calling a kid from India a "pagan" sounds equally plausible.

I call bullshit."

I would have to agree. Indians, be they Hindu ,Muslim, Christian or secularist have a bizarre talent for finding bigots under every bed and in every closet. It is utter ignorance combined with arrogance and a sense of victimhood both real and imagined. It is just incredibly frustrating to talk to them in any serious capacity

I had a high school reunion recently in Dubai and a class mate came over from India to stay with me . Now this character ,never the brightest bulb in the box, had unthinkingly swallowed all the leftish shibboleths wholesale.

When I was watching Red Eye with Greg Gutfeld on TV (hooked up from my laptop as its not available on international broadcast), he was aghast. "This is Fox News!!..isn't it Republican?!!"

Why yes it I answered . And to aggravate him further I taunted him ...they give that damn communist Obama the treatment he deserves

At this he was positively apoplectic ..."so whats wrong with communism" he asked or rather frothed at the mouth

Nothing if you want to pay upto 100% taxes I told him.

"No way dude, communism helps the poor"

I will spare any more of his idiocy but needless to say I didn't get too far with him

To some extant most Indians are a version of this character. They believe they are incredibly well informed and intelligent despite all evidence to the contrary

I have just about had it with their nonsense. I have decided not to argue but just aggravate

Anonymous said...

Chua and Meathead reflect their own native national cultures.

China is mostly Chinese. So, Chinese feel safe in China and openly feel proud of being Chinese racially and culturally and historically. So, they think, 'this is how we are' and 'this is how they are'. So, what makes us like us and what makes them like them. So, Chinese are more likely to be honest about cultures, races, and differences. It doesn't hurt China to think about such matter.

India is very different. The elites of India never felt as one with rest of India, and there are many gradations of color, caste, culture, cult and religion, and etc. There are so many divisions, and the challenge of the Indian elites has been "how to manage all this vast diversities". Since cultural and racial differences often lead to distrust, disagreement, and even explosive violence, Indian elites have mastered the art of having two faces: maintain their elite power and privileges while yammering endlessly about the need for greater equality and 'social justice'.

There is a 'we' mentality among Chinese. There is no such among Indians since there is no uniform or unified 'we' in India.

In a way, US is going from China-mode to India-mode. In the past, Anglos and Anglo-ized Americans were the bulk of America. So, they thought in terms of 'we' and what is good for 'we'. Elites and white masses saw eye to eye on certain key issues, as is the case today in China.

But today's elites in US are Jews and lib wasp collaborators and Asian elites. And US population is becoming more fractured racially and culturally. Since discussion of differences can lead to all sorts of anger and resentment, there is a ever greater need to suppress certain topics and yammer endlessly and therapeutically about the panacea of 'equality' and 'diversity'.

Anonymous said...

If anyone has a superiority complex, it's Mehta himself.

From his book Maximum City:

And there was no good reason to change the name of Bombay. It is nonsense to say that Mumbai was the original name. Bombay was created by the Portuguese and the British from a cluster of malarial islands, and to them should go the baptismal rights. The Gujuratis and Maharashtrians always called it Mumbai when speaking Gujurati or Marathi, and Bombay when speaking English. There was no need to choose. In 1995, the Sena demanded that we choose, in all our languages, Mumbai.

This is how the ghatis took revenge on us.They renamed everything after their politicians, and finally they renamed even the city. If they couldn't afford to live on our roads, they could at least occupy the road signs.

Anonymous said...

Regarding BBT, the farthest stretch on that show is the tiny, frail, loser Jewish guy who lives with his mother - ending up marrying the hottest girl on the show (even hotter than the lead female, IMHO). Of course, this is probably just projection by the show's Jewish creator, Chuck Lorre. Call it the Woody Allen Syndrome.

Bottledwater said...

Indians slavishly played running dog to the Brits for 200 yrs. Before that, they were slavish running dogs to Moghuls. Mehta is part of that tradition. He's such a good running dog to the new elites of the US. Everything he says is such a cliche not only favored but enforced by the pc police. Would TIME ever invite Sailer or Richwine to write a review or opinion piece? No, but it sure rolled out the red carpet for a well-trained running dog like Mehta. Woof.

But then liberals would accuse Dinesh Dsouza of being a running dog because he pushes conservative values, racism, and sucks up to Christians and Israel. As Steve sailer points out, any theory that explains both a fact and it's opposite is not good.

Dan said...

German battlefield supremacy is a fact.

They are also technical geniuses and very very effective at various sports. Especially team games.

The allies only won because they invited in the whole world to stamp on Germany's guts.

All's fair though.

Anonymous said...

"'Sanskrit is the most suitable language for computer software ...'

Is this a thing now? I have never heard this. Any rationale for it?"

The original claim overstates things, but formal Sanskrit grammar is pretty amazing because it is a "formal system" ... created over 2,000 years ago. Wiki has a short discussion of this in the entry on Panini (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C4%81%E1%B9%87ini#Comparison_with_modern_formal_systems) and there is also this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyakarana#P.C4.81.E1.B9.87ini.27s_school

Anonymous said...

Hey the new Chairman of Microsoft is an Indian-American. He's not even from IIT, but rather a second tier engineering school. Just goes to show that with hard work, even the B+ Indian kids can make it in the Anglo world-space. This is more a tribute to the Anglo world-space than to the B+ Indian kids.

Anonymous said...

Sanskrit is great because Panini's grammar is great. Panini's grammar is one of the foremost intellectual achievements of the ancient world.

Modern linguistics and philology is indebted the study of Sanskrit.

Saussure studied Panini extensively before he came up with structuralism.

Mark Caplan said...

"38% of doctors in the U.S.A. are Indians."

Based on information readily available online, there are 35,000 Indian doctors in the U.S. out of a total of 835,000 doctors. So 4% are Indian, not 38%. Maybe the author misplaced his "Indian-invented" decimal point.

Willis said...

Anonymous 9:33 AM has an excellent point. Focus on the history of oppression *in America* (e.g., every Leftiy's favorite Howard Zion book) is all about using white guilt as a political weapon. I'm a white guy born in the US in the late 70s, yet somehow I'm responsible for Jim Crow, slavery, various battles with the Indians, Japanese internment, and the Chinese Exclusion Act; I'm even responsible for the Holocaust, apparently - especially the S.S. St Louis.

Never mind that I wasn't alive for any of it, may not have approved of any of it if I had been alive, nor that my ancestors actually fought for the Union in the Civil War. I'm required to feel guilt for all of it.

But a Haitian or Punjabi or Nigerian or Yemeni or Sinhalese or Chinaman who just moved here yesterday bears no portion of the blame for what happened in his lifetime, in his country, while inheriting a mess of grievances against me for things which happened long before my birth.

Guilt is nothing more than a political weapon.

Anonymous said...

"When my family went to America, we left behind a system in which people are often denigrated because of their caste, religion, language or skin color."

Welcome to America where people are denigrated and blacklisted because they notice differences in race, culture, and ethnicity.
Meathead seems to have become fully American in his PC yammering.

At the very least, thank God US doesn't have cricket or field hockey as sports. Or else, we might never hear the end of how Asian-Indians weren't allowed into cricket clubs.

Bottledwater said...

Paradox of new elites. To enter the exclusive world, you have to speak inclusivity.
The new country club rules: you must be very smart and rich but you must deny race or culture has anything to do with your riches.


Elites have to be liberal to avoid angering the masses ala occupy wall street.

Anonymous said...

" or Hispanics who have been part of American history for nearly 400 years" - guess again.

"A question I have is what happened to Jews in NYC? Actually upscale Whites from everywhere else in the US seem to be filling the niche and real estate once occupied by Woody Allen's parents. " - their kids are apparently abandoning science and achievement. We'll see.

"All I can say is: Bobby Jindal for (First Indian) President!" - he is catholic, the hindus hate him.

San Franciscan non-monk said...

OT: out of control rioting in whitetopia Seattle ;) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo4z77OvznU

Anonymous said...

http://www.aaai.org/ojs/index.php/aimagazine/article/viewArticle/466

From AI magazine

Knowledge Representation in Sanskrit and Artificial Intelligence
Rick Briggs

Abstract

In the past twenty years, much time, effort, and money has been expended on designing an unambiguous representation of natural language to make them accessible to computer processing, These efforts have centered around creating schemata designed to parallel logical relations with relations expressed by the syntax and semantics of natural languages, which are clearly cumbersome and ambiguous in their function as vehicles for the transmission of logical data. Understandably, there is a widespread belief that natural languages are unsuitable for the transmission of many ideas that artificial languages can render with great precision and mathematical rigor. But this dichotomy, which has served as a premise underlying much work in the areas of linguistics and artificial intelligence, is a false one. There is at least one language, Sanskrit, which for the duration of almost 1000 years was a living spoken language with a considerable literature of its own. Besides works of literary value, there was a long philosophical and grammatical tradition that has continued to exist with undiminished vigor until the present century. Among the accomplishments of the grammarians can be reckoned a method for paraphrasing Sanskrit in a manner that is identical not only in essence but in form with current work in Artificial Intelligence. This article demonstrates that a natural language can serve as an artificial language also, and that much work in AI has been reinventing a wheel millenia old. First, a typical Knowledge Representation Scheme (using Semantic Nets) will be laid out, followed by an outline of the method used by the ancient Indian grammarians to analyze sentences unambiguously. Finally, the clear parallelism between the two will be demonstrated, and the theoretical implications of this equivalence will be given.

Anonymous said...

One of the commenters here has tried to blame Indian castism on Arabs, Persians, Scythians, etc. I don't believe this for a moment. Yes, Middle Easterners are very clannish, but Indians beat them and everyone else on that score. And they don't stop at genealogical clannishness. They're the most status-conscious people I'm aware of. British classism looks amateurish in comparison. In the corporate environment Indians are more interested in hierarchy than anyone else. Who supervises whom, who deserves to supervise whom and why, who's out of his place, whose dignity is damaged by what sort of work - they spend more time and effort discussing such questions than anybody else. If Scandinavia is the worldwide epicenter of the egalitarianism, India is the worldwide epicenter of its opposite. It would be fun to distill their (opposite) version of Jante's Law.

Gubbler of the Society of Reformed Chechenistics said...

I once attended Indian Night at my college. It was a weekend celebration of Indianness in the main auditorium and the place was packed with Indians(and maybe some Pakistanis, but I couldn't tell one from the other).

It was a night of song, comedy, fashion, dance, and etc. It was the silliest thing I ever did see.

I think Hindians were post-modern before post-modern.

mario savio said...

Re Indian ethnocentric:

A great place to observe this is Berkeley, the town. It's small enough to observe who talks to whom and who patronizes which businesses. In short, you never see any Indian-black interaction at all.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuXjoJKp6b4

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIGMoior4go

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xgDN9OTIEk

Elephant in the room.

Anonymous said...

"I want them to know about the teachers at the Catholic school in Queens who called me a 'pagan,'

This is a common refrain among self pitying privileged Hindus in India. It does not however stop them from sending their children to catholic schools.

slumber_j said...

An Anonymous said, "Steve's reference to Ukrainians - their impressive academic performance is because most Ukrainians in the US aren't esp especially unrepresentative of the Ukrainians back home, because most "Ukrainians" here are Jews."

No, the Ukranians in question are quite Christian. The reason they're doing so much better is that they've been here forever, so they're mostly not what you'd actually call immigrants.

Their old East Village neighborhood centered on the Blue and Gold Tavern--or, I suppose some might say, on St. George Ukranian Catholic Church, founded 1905 and located across the street from McSorley's. But they're sort of petering out as a presence in Manhattan, just as the Italians et al. did before them.

The Chinese on the other hand are coming faster and faster, and the new arrivals tend not to be rich. So it's pretty misleading to compare the groups--quite possibly intentionally so.

Anonymous said...

'Pagan' refers to all non-Christian stuff. Greek and Roman stuff is 'pagan' too.

With homos celebrating all kinds of bacchanalia, maybe it should be called fagan.

Anonymous said...

Poor Mehta. Called pagan?

I guess it's up there will injustices like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pslMCRoNzXQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxahVMXcDWE

Anonymous said...

If Hindus beat up Jews like they beat up Christians, it'd be big news in the US.

But there is this bogus image in the West of tolerant Hindus as bulwark against intolerant Muslims.

Anonymous said...

"No, the Ukranians in question are quite Christian. The reason they're doing so much better is that they've been here forever, so they're mostly not what you'd actually call immigrants."

Something fishy here. Even wasps who've been here forever don't have college degree rates at 96%.

Anonymous said...

"In 1916 Madison Grant wrote The Passing of the Great Race, which purported to demonstrate the racial and cultural superiority of Northern Europeans over Southern Europeans."

"I'm annoyed that Time wouldn't give me the column inches to work in a clever reference to Tom Buchanan in The Great Gatsby here."

Northern Europeans superior to southern ones in IQ? Maybe. Northern Asians seem to be superior in IQ to southern ones.
Why shouldn't such issues not be discussed? Many northern Italians feel they are superior to southern ones--and for good reason. And Jews cracked many jokes about dumb Poles and Russians.

When it comes to running fast, west africans feel superior to east africans. when it comes to long distance running, east africans feel superior.

and if northern europeans felt superior, it was payback as, for most of european history, southern europeans mocked and made funny of northern ones as barbaric and stupid.

Odd thing though... if northern Europeans are smarter, why were southern europeans first to have civilization? maybe warmer climate allowed greater population density in the south with year-round agriculture.
Also, southern europe was in proximity with warmer near east and northern africa and asia.

This may also be why southern american indians developed civilization but northern american indians didn't even though maybe northern american indians were smarter or at least just as smart as ones in the south. north was colder and it wasn't as easy to develop and use agriculture, so the north lagged the south in development. But suppose civilizational ideas of south america had traveled up north--just like southern civilization eventually affected the northern Germanic barbarians. Maybe north American indians might have developed an even greater civilization than incas and other fellers.

maybe culture is like a germ and grows best and fastest in warm, fecund, and germy regions. since south was warmer and messier, maybe it led to earlier and faster growth of culture. But too much germ growth can make things rot and decay. Overgrowth often leads to growth of unhealthy culture as well. And one can see the problems of overgrowth in India and Near East where things got too messy.

So, even though culture first developed in the steamier/hotter south, it was better used and controlled in the cooler north with more homogeneous folks with lighter skins and cooler heads. It's like Japanese did something neater with Buddhism than Indians did.

In China, civilization first began in the warmer regions but Chinese culture reached its cultural height in the cooler north around Beijing.

It seems guys like Grant and the fictional Buchanan were, in a way, identifying with American Indians whom the white man rubbed off. Indians were overrun by the endless tide of white folks. White tide drowned the red tide. So, if whites could do it to Reds, maybe the same thing could happen to whites.
Though some 'yellow peril' stuff was nasty, whites had the right to fear it as the American West was vastly underpopulated. If China and Japan had been given open access to the American West in the 19th century and early 20th century, they would have been drowned by tide of yellow. I mean why conquer and settle a great land to hand it over to another race? What kind of an idiot would do that?

I mean Russians were not stupid enough to conquer Siberia and then tell the Chinese and Japanese, 'hey fellas, come here and take over what we conquered. it's all yours.' Russians may be dumb, but they are not that dumb. White Americans were smart too about demographics but they sure became stupid.



slumber_j said...

Another Anonymous or maybe the same we'll never know said of the Ukranian stats:

"Something fishy here. Even wasps who've been here forever don't have college degree rates at 96%."

The article is talking about high-school graduation rates, and the number is 94.4%.

SFG said...

1. All very nicely done and correct.

2. Lay off the Ritalin. We love watching you go, but it ain't healthy.

Anonymous said...

If Hindus beat up Jews like they beat up Christians, it'd be big news in the US.

But there is this bogus image in the West of tolerant Hindus as bulwark against intolerant Muslims.

Maybe because unlike Muslims Hindu's leave off at beating Christians rather than making a snuff film. It's these kinds of shades of difference that decide these types of things.

Svigor said...

More explanations of American history from fuzzy foreigners. Hey Indian guy, why don't you go mud wrestle Amy Chua and stop bothering us?

Non-whites think their non-white skin privilege means they get to lecture whites. Too dumb to know they're racist?

"Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations" really, really sounds exactly like something a white boy in a Queens Catholic school would have said in the 80s or 90s (which is when I assume this is supposed to have happened). And to a kid from India, since American whites cna't see any difference between blacks and people from India. And a nun in that era calling a kid from India a "pagan" sounds equally plausible.

I call bullshit.


The idea that God/Gaia gave Indians a double-dose of the bald-faced liar gene is racist. Racist, I tell you.

OT Interesting essay on failures of integration by white leftie Obama campaigner who actually admits he never knew any black people (even though he grew up in the south in the 1980s).

That's quite a feat. I was just telling someone the other day that Yankees don't seem to understand just how many blacks there are in the south, and just how much overlap there is between whites' and blacks' territories. It's almost impossible for whites to grow up that way in the south, and has been for some time.

As for Indian immigrants having the Triple Package, investigate it.

What's to investigate? Takes about 5 minutes with a search engine to establish India's a shithole and whatever triple package Indians have, no one else wants it. Investigation over.

This is straight out of the Julie Chen playbook (Chen being the tv news reporter who claimed she was pressured into eyelid surgery by her white producer-boss). One need simply recount outrageous and unverifiable oral acts of 'racism' 15+ years after the fact.

It's all about the bravery of love. East Asians definitely didn't get a double-dose of the bald-faced liar gene, either. Nossir. No, the fact that Chen was willing to tell a bald-faced lie to uphold the leftist Narrative just shows how much she loves humanity.

I was just commenting about this recently, too: leftists love to bring up their bullshit anecdotes to "counter" statistics. Every time I drop racial crime stats into a thread in lefty territory, they come back with how they've only been raped/molested/robbed by white guys.

Maybe the incidents he describes are bullshit, but it's not inconceivable that an Indian kid in the 80s would have had some uncomfortable racial moments. There's no point denying that.

Point being, yes, I'm going to call out some lefty for his bullshit just-so anecdotes. It's not about what's conceivable, it's about the fact that they don't have the moral authority to drop these convenient and unverifiable anecdotes and expect people to accept them on faith.

Indians are just smug in a way that makes you want to knock their heads off. Christ (cool how I worked that in), they make that Dershowitz guy seem like a mellow, grounded dude.

Yeah, it's like they never heard of India. And as anon points out, their arrogance is almost certainly a product of their racism, making it even funnier when they play the PC spoils game.

Black family was destroyed by welfare and 60s youth culture.

I disagree. Blacks just regressed to the sub-Saharan mean.

Anonymous said...

While I have some schadenfreude with Obamacare affecting the 36% (Indians) in the medical field, I'm afraid this group will branch out into more cushy and lucrative pursuits such as police work. And we see more of this:

Boston Herald: Worcester Cop (Rajat Sharda) charged in rape

Anonymous said...

"Black family was destroyed by welfare and 60s youth culture."

"I disagree. Blacks just regressed to the sub-Saharan mean."

Prolly, but cultural shifts in the 60s enabled and encouraged it.

Anonymous said...

Hindus have a million gods. A milliple package would have pleased meathead more.

Anonymous said...

Among all the peoples in the world, Asian-Indians have the weirdest complexes.

Too many contradictions in 'India'.
It's like a gilded ivory toilet bowl clogged with shit that goes back 1000 yrs.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Chua is more comfortable about speaking of 'Chinese-ness' cuz such a thing really exists. Though Chinese of different regions and provinces are said to say nasty things about one another, we all saw how Chinese felt as one when Tibetan protesters interfered with Chinese torch bearers in the runup to the Olympics. Indeed, even in sports, Chinese have more of sense of shared purpose than Indians who never seem to come together to win medals.

But what of 'Indian-ness'? Is there a single India? Wasn't 'India' a political concept created by the British? For some reason, it stuck whereas 'Indochina' didn't. 'Indonesia' stuck too for some reason.
Maybe what held India together was the fact that most people were Hindu. And most people in Indonesia were Muslims. Also, their societies were fragmented along too many clannish lines to have formed anything like a pre-colonial national culture.
But Indochina was made up of three people who were culturally and geographically distinct from one another long before the French arrived: Laotians, Cambodians, and Vietnamese.

Maybe, underneath all this rhetoric, what Meathead resents most is the fact that there is no 'India' to speak of that is comparable to China. To speak of 'Indian' qualities is misleading because there are too many divergences and diversity in India. Maybe this would have been less so had India been ruled by a totalitarian ruler for several decades who might have imposed a powerful sense of shared Indianness. But under democracy following British rule, India was allowed to fester in so many different cultures, localities, and etc.
Maybe China would have done better without communism(as Chinese had an understanding of Chinese-ness) and India might have done better with something like it. While communism in India might have killed millions, it might have better defined what it means to be Indian.

Though Meathead speaks as though he's offended by 'superioritism', he may actually really be upset that India is actually short of people such as himself. In truth, it has too many dummies. It has some superior people but, as a whole, it is a stinkpot mess.

Harold said...

How’s this for Chua’s superiority/inferiority concept? An Indian man having moved to New Zealand and working in I.T. remarked to me, apropos of nothing i had said, that the I.T. sector in India was much larger than the I.T. sector in New Zealand. He said this to me in a manner as if to say that really it is we New Zealand hicks who ought to feel inferior and not he. I diplomatically replied that India was somewhat larger than New Zealand. “that‘s true” he admitted.

Imagine the sense of superiority of the white man’s world that must have been impressed upon his mind even to conceive of the idea of comparing the I.T. sector of a country of four million people to that of India.

By the way, the right here in New Zealand is not overtly Christian (indeed the right wing prime minister is Jewish). Perhaps as a result, East Asians tend to vote right wing, such being in their economic interest. Indians still vote left. Moreover, the richer East Asians are, the more likely they are to vote right, while only some poor, store owning Indians who like the right’s tough on crime stance seem to vote right.

Bottledwater said...

What's interesting is how Indians are the only race (besides whites, of course) that can be made fun of on primetime television without a single outcry: For the past few weeks I've been watching reruns of "Big Bang Theory" and have been quite interested in how the Indian character Raj in season 7 still can't get with women (with comical exceptions, of course). He's totally the stereotypical indian beta male, while the white betas somehow get girlfriends/wives, but of course they are totally whipped.
There's also a minor character that's a black HR lady-of course the guys are puddy in her wise hands.


What's even more interesting is that despite the fact that that show is fictional, the 4 genius main characters are racially realistic. Two of the four are Jewish or Indian American, just as HBD would expect given the disproportionate number of geniuses these races produce. It's interesting that they didn't make one of the geniuses black just to be politically correct, they kept it scientifically correct, just as you'd expect from a show about scientists.

Bottledwater said...

"Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations" really, really sounds exactly like something a white boy in a Queens Catholic school would have said in the 80s or 90s (which is when I assume this is supposed to have happened). And to a kid from India, since American whites cna't see any difference between blacks and people from India. And a nun in that era calling a kid from India a "pagan" sounds equally plausible.

I call bullshit


It's fairly believable. Some white kid learns about Lincoln in history and thinks it's a funny joke. And lots of kids fail to distinguish between Indians and blacks. Indeed in Britain it's very common to refer to Indians as blacks. An Indian man, particularly from his era, would not need to fabricate racial anecdotes. He'd have enough true stories to draw from.

Anonymous said...

That would be the "tiny, frail, loser, Jewish guy" who holds a master's degree from MIT, works at one of the nation's finest research institutions and went into space?

Yeah, of course he couldn't get a pretty girl with an eye for brains..

Much of the show is over-the-top. It's a sitcom.

Anonymous said...


" Sanskrit is the most suitable language for computer software ..."

Is this a thing now? I have never heard this. Any rationale for it?

I once had an acquaintance who knew Latin. It was really weird how he could say whole paragraphs in one short sentence. Guess it is a common meme now, but I kind of think that language shapes your thinking and perceptions (there was a blog entry or two recently here, but I forgot the terminology). And Latin seems more orderly and structured than German, well cooler anyway.

So what is the thinking on Sanskrit and programming? I know nothing about Sanskrit other than it is a pretty old language, only used by Indians, and only to read their religious texts and maybe in ceremonies.


Sir William Jones had nice things to say about it back in 1786, so maybe it is a really cool language that could prepare your mind for rigorously logical thinking:

The Sanscrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either...

Perspective said...

Speaking of racism in India:
http://goo.gl/wJtWI3

Anonymous said...

"it's not inconceivable that an Indian kid in the 80s would have had some uncomfortable racial moments"

Possible, surely, but I grew up then and never once witnessed anyone address a minority directly by any slur (middle class NE Ohio). The older I get, the more my past is whitewashed as if only recently most Americans started treating minorities as regular people.

HA said...

...after travelling halfway around the world, he was able to attend a private parochial school belonging to a religious organization he wasn't a member of. Where else can that happen?

Well, India, for one place. Even though Christians are a tiny minority there, the "convent schools" run by Catholics and Anglicans and so forth used to teach most anyone whose parents wanted to consider themselves successful, not to mention a large number of the less privileged. That may still be true - I suspect some of the readers here will be able to shed more light. Therefore, sending a son to a Catholic school after emigrating is just following in a grand tradition.

Anonymous said...

Tower of Babel, huh. I bet Sumer was like this just before it collapsed.

Anyway Jews created a passive-aggressive victim strategy which works very well as a competitive tactic on some euro-descended peoples and now unsurprisingly every other non euro-white group is copying them.

There's no surprise here. Given how successful it has been for Jews why wouldn't all the others copy it?

.

"What can and should be denied is the Indian's implication that whites now owe him"

White people's acceptance of collective guilt is very odd - even with all the anti-white media and school propaganda you'd think they'd notice the massive double standard on this.

.

"Well, if Indians are so great, what explains India?"

A variation on what will lead to America's collapse - the Indian elite has only a low sense of stewardship to the commonweal of India as a whole. They may have a lot for their region or caste or family network but it doesn't extend out from there.

Most countries were like that in the past including Europe - an elite who didn't give a **** about anything but their own dynasty. Most countries are still like that now. The reason India particularly stands out is the Indians you meet are obviously bright enough to do better.

The brief Euro experiment in non-s****y countries currently looks likely to be a historical fluke.

.

"Indeed in Britain it's very common to refer to Indians as blacks."

No it isn't - maybe it was during the empire.

.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/antwerp-s-diamond-business-jews-surrender-gem-trade-to-indians-a-416243.html

I had a private bet with myself this was going to happen.

Jews like to think their success, especially in Northern Europe and Northern Europe derived countries is down to cleverness but a lot of it has always been down to the advantages of being a relatively tight-knit minority among an increasingly loose-knit majority.

So now after opening the borders to get rid of white people they're going to suddenly find themselves competing with equally tight-knit groups - and they will lose.

Oswald Spengler said...

If the United States is such an irredeemably racist and oppressive country to "peoples of color," why are millions upon millions of Third World immigrants clamoring to move here and stay? Wouldn't they logically be trying their level best to get out?

Anonymous said...

What's interesting is how Indians are the only race (besides whites, of course) that can be made fun of on primetime television without a single outcry

Its acceptable in the visual media generally.

Asian slut Amy in Futurama and her unpleasant parents.

Hank's unpleasant Asian next door in King of the Hill.

The billionaire buffoon in the most recent Mission: Impossible. (humiliated by half black Paula Paton)

Its a safe way for liberals top pretend they are being edgy. They would never portray blacks like this.

Anonymous said...

It's perfectly possible for an Indian kid in the 80s (or today) getting some kind of racist comment - especially if they're living somewhere urban.

The problems with the point are:

a) He is very likely to have heard racist comments directed at himself from multiple sources and not just white and including comments made by his own relatives or himself about other groups.

b) The implication that collective guilt and responsibility applies to all white people because of those comments (but not to any other group).

Anonymous said...

Take a Pride--Being an Indian. 38% of Doctors in U.S.A. are Indians.

Docs in USA @700,000

Indians in USA @3 million.

So it seems at least 250,000 US docs should be Indian. To put it another way one in every twelve Indians in the US should be a doc.

Right.

Anonymous said...

"Possible, surely, but I grew up then and never once witnessed anyone address a minority directly by any slur (middle class NE Ohio). The older I get, the more my past is whitewashed as if only recently most Americans started treating minorities as regular people. " - well thats just because its hard to see racism when you're white you racist.

Anonymous said...

Possible, surely, but I grew up then and never once witnessed anyone address a minority directly by any slur (middle class NE Ohio). The older I get, the more my past is whitewashed as if only recently most Americans started treating minorities as regular people.

Where I grew up, across the lake from you in Ontario, in the 1970s, an influx of East Indians triggered some really intense racial prejudice. One guy I knew used to shout abuse at "Pakis" while cruising the town's main drag, and on one occasion had to be restrained from getting out the car to confront one. Otherwise, he was normal, popular guy, and he didn't seem to hate blacks or feather-Indians.

Anonymous said...

Indians are no more than 5% MDs in the country. Based on average medical school students composition, this number is likely to get to 10% within a 5-10 years. 38% figure is utter bullshit, of course.

Anonymous said...

"it's not inconceivable that an Indian kid in the 80s would have had some uncomfortable racial moments"

There will always be jerks. Even now. Whites get it too from non-whites. I've seen it go both ways.

peterike said...

Random snideness!

Hey the new Chairman of Microsoft is an Indian-American. He's not even from IIT, but rather a second tier engineering school. Just goes to show that with hard work, even the B+ Indian kids can make it in the Anglo world-space.

You don't know anything about how one gets to be CEO, do you?

And lots of kids fail to distinguish between Indians and blacks. Indeed in Britain it's very common to refer to Indians as blacks.

I don't know about Britain, but I can assure that in America no person has ever, not even once, confused an Indian with a black.

By the way, the right here in New Zealand is not overtly Christian (indeed the right wing prime minister is Jewish).

What, the Jews control New Zealand now too??

ben tillman said...

Based on information readily available online, there are 35,000 Indian doctors in the U.S. out of a total of 835,000 doctors. So 4% are Indian, not 38%. Maybe the author misplaced his "Indian-invented" decimal point.

Thank you, Mark. That's what I would have guessed.

ben tillman said...

What's interesting is how Indians are the only race (besides whites, of course) that can be made fun of on primetime television without a single outcry:

Jerry Seinfeld/Larry David called an Indian an Indian giver. The Indians are second from the bottom on the totem pole of racial victimology.

Anonymous said...

Sort of OT from the Nature/nurture focus of this post, but the appointment of Satya Nadella to the CEO position of Microsoft illustrates how immigration and diversity actually are a mixed bag. Mr. Nadella, who arrived in the US at age 20, appears to be a brilliant, eminently qualified and highly conscientious tech executive. One of Steve's major themes is the threat of dysgenic population changes. Too bad he rarely writes about how being a magnet for the most ambitious and talented people from around the world is one of the major reasons US has an edge over the rest of the world in technology, among other areas.

Bottledwater said...

I don't know about Britain, but I can assure that in America no person has ever, not even once, confused an Indian with a black.

A muscular/fat dark skinned Indian with a shaved head will be confused for black all the time in America

Rohan Swee said...

Bottledwater: Indeed in Britain it's very common to refer to Indians as blacks.

Which has squat to do with Mehta's experience in the U.S. Indeed in America it's very common for us to be confused by the way the Brits call non-Africans "black" and Middle-Easterners "Asian".

An Indian man, particularly from his era, would not need to fabricate racial anecdotes. He'd have enough true stories to draw from.

His "era"? What, those ancient shameful days of Jawaharlal Crow? We're talking about the '80s. If he didn't have to fabricate the literal "racial anecdotes", he certainly had to polish and embellish their context and meaning considerably for the purposes of playing the Suffering Victim of Horrible Terrible Dreadful American Racism.

Anonymous said...

>>To speak of 'Indian' qualities is misleading because there are too many divergences and diversity in India. Maybe this would have been less so had India been ruled by a totalitarian ruler for several decades who might have imposed a powerful sense of shared Indianness. But under democracy following British rule, India was allowed to fester in so many different cultures, localities, and etc.


This is typical colonial rhetoric. Churchill always tried to undermine Indian unity in the same manner. Yet the civilization of India is continuous and there are most definitely Indian qualities.

The belief that a unified state is the sin qua non of defining ethnic qualities is a Eurocentric bias.

Read Sudhir Kakar's "The Indians" or Rajiv Malhotra's "Being Different" or AK Ramanujan's fine essay, "Is there an Indian Way of Thinking?" for understanding more about this

HA said...

...after travelling halfway around the world, he was able to attend a private parochial school belonging to a religious organization he wasn't a member of. Where else can that happen?

Well, India, for a start. Even though Christians are a tiny minority there, their "convent schools" used to educate most all the elites (as well as many of the less privileged). I'm not surprised the Mehtas would send their son to a Catholic school - it's a grand Indian tradition.

Anonymous said...

peterike said:
" don't know about Britain, but I can assure that in America no person has ever, not even once, confused an Indian with a black. "

I worked with blacks that confused an Indian (OK, a Sri Lankan Tamil) for one of their own. Not sure how, as he had straight hair and fairly Euro feature, though dark skin.

Anonymous said...

No, the Ukranians in question are quite Christian. The reason they're doing so much better is that they've been here forever, so they're mostly not what you'd actually call immigrants.

Their old East Village neighborhood centered on the Blue and Gold Tavern--or, I suppose some might say, on St. George Ukranian Catholic Church, founded 1905 and located across the street from McSorley's. But they're sort of petering out as a presence in Manhattan, just as the Italians et al. did before them.

The Chinese on the other hand are coming faster and faster, and the new arrivals tend not to be rich. So it's pretty misleading to compare the groups--quite possibly intentionally so.


Can't blame the blog proprietor for putting his best foot forward.

Anonymous said...

One of your best posts ever.

I just laughed and laughed.

I even enjoyed meeting another member of the noxious Foner clan.

Brilliant.

Reg Cæsar said...

While Chua and Rubenfeld are not the only ones peddling this pernicious line of thought… Suckatoo Mehta

Did he really say "peddling"? Like, with pushcarts? In Chinatown and the Lower East Side? Stereotype alert!!

Reg Cæsar said...

Bottledwaterwalla: A muscular/fat dark skinned Indian with a shaved head will be confused for black all the time in America

Do those even exist? Sounds like he'd be asking for it.

I don't think many Minneapolitans would confuse a Somali, Ethiopian or Eritrean with a black American. Too many points of difference-- and (dot) Indians have many more.

As a "haole" schoolboy in Honolulu, I had no trouble distinguishing those of Japanese and Chinese ancestry. Even though they had the same accents and facial expressions, and by then (the mid-'60s)were thoroughly Americanized.

After a while, you get pretty adept at this.

Yes, there was that fool who shot a Sikh after Arabs attacked the WTC and Pentagon. But that killer was Mexican.

ben tillman said...


A muscular/fat dark skinned Indian with a shaved head will be confused for black all the time in America

I'm not even sure there is such a creature, but if there is, very few Americans would be confused in the manner you suggest.

ben tillman said...

Too bad he rarely writes about how being a magnet for the most ambitious and talented people from around the world is one of the major reasons US has an edge over the rest of the world in technology, among other areas.

Hardly. This country's technological advantage comes from its native White population. Your position is pure propaganda.

Truthseeker said...

"38% of Doctors in U.S.A. are Indians. 36% of NASA employees are Indians. 34% of MICROSOFT employees are Indians."

This is a fine example of brahmin hindu lies and megalomania. ALL those numbers are WILDLY STUPID exaggerations that anyone with an internet connection can easily expose. Yet low IQ, gullible and delusional hindus keep spouting this ridiculous BS all over the internet.


ben tillman said...

Possible, surely, but I grew up then and never once witnessed anyone address a minority directly by any slur (middle class NE Ohio).

Thirty years later, I still haven't heard any racial slur addressed to an Asian Indian, as there are no such slurs available in American English.

ben tillman said...

Maybe the incidents he describes are bullshit, but it's not inconceivable that an Indian kid in the 80s would have had some uncomfortable racial moments. There's no point denying that.

There's no point mentioning it, either. Every White person in a multiracial society has had many "uncomfortable racial moments". BFD.

Anonymous said...

@ ben tillman

I used the specific example of Satya Nadella to show that US advantage of tech is not "exclusively" due to native white population. Not that we do not deserve credit also, probably the lion's share.

The point of my comment was that contra Steve's motif of immigration = bad, immigration is a mixed bag.

A policy of skimming off the top of the rest of the world, inviting in only people like Mr. Nadella, would probably be best of all.

the melting pot said...

I'd pay to see it if this Sucka Beta guy were booked on MTV or 106 & Park, and then they asked him whether he finds Wu Tang or West Coast G-funk production style was more influential on modern hip-hop, and then he said he really has no opinion and they press him why not, and basically him just squirming for 10 minutes.

Anonymous said...

"Suckatoo Mehta"

Det is soh rehsist!

Silver said...

Possible, surely, but I grew up then and never once witnessed anyone address a minority directly by any slur (middle class NE Ohio).

Well I've never personally witnessed a traffic collision but I can't conclude from that that they don't occur.

I grew up in the 80s in a small city in Australia. As someone who bore a very strong resemblance to the Karate Kid (the original one, not the black one) I can absolutely, 100%, cross-my-heart-hope-to-die assure you that I experienced numerous racial incidents, and that's not counting the easygoing, all-in-good-fun ones from friends.

My favorite one was with a friend when I was about ten. His dad was driving and came very close to hitting a guy who ran out from between parked cars. His dad screamed out the window, "Ya f--n wog!!" Insults after someone screwed up seemed like fair game so that didn't bother me. When we got to his house my friend told his younger brother (about eight) about it. The brother laughed and shook his head knowingly, "F--n wogs." My friend said, "Silver's a wog." The little brother's eyes opened wide, "Are ya?" I wasn't sure what to make of that, since I thought race was something visual and immediately apparent. "Well.. yeah," I said, implying "duh." We used to let the little brother play with us and he liked me, so he answered, "But I thought wogs sucked!"

In my early teens new neighbors moved in. The father was coldly polite (in a working class way) but it was easy to sense he didn't like me. His teenage daughter was a real bitch. Unfortunately she was also quite pretty, which made her insults sting all the more. The racial treatment I got from her and her boyfriend are the only incidents I can say I harbored burning, lasting resentment over. (Today I can see where they were coming from and what they were taking a stand against, in their own hamfisted way.)

Anonymous said...

"A policy of skimming off the top of the rest of the world, inviting in only people like Mr. Nadella, would probably be best of all."

Except experience shows the opposite is true. Brains without loyalty is the worst possible combination.

The "top of the rest of the world" are the naturally loyal and/or commonweal orientated people. Brains are simply a bonus on top of that single critical foundation.

Silver said...

There's no point mentioning it, either. Every White person in a multiracial society has had many "uncomfortable racial moments". BFD.

That's true. But if you want to have a real discussion certain incidents really do need to be mentioned and acknowledged, because they typically provide the backdrop for a person's views on racial issues. Some posters' reactions smacked of "No way, no how would an Indian in the 80s have experienced racism, get real," which is obviously silly. And it's just as silly (if not sillier, given the stakes) to deny whites' experiences too, which is why you don't find me doing that.

Anonymous said...

Re: Sikhs and Punjabis

There are a lot of Jatt Sikh Punjabis in Western Canada. They have a reputation for being rude, ostentatious, misogynistic, and obnoxious. A lot of them put multiple families under 1 roof and buy huge houses. Most of them are blue collar laborers and their children are not academically inclined. A lot of them are alcoholic and plenty of their kids are mixed up in drugs. Their sons wander around the south Vancouver suburbs harassing whites, to the extent that there's been rapid white flight. Their community has produced several near NHL caliber hockey players and 1 Olympic wrestler. Their sons are womanizers and their daughters often tend to have loose sexual mores, but their illegitimacy rate and intermarriage rate are both very low.

New Zealand and Australia have recently loosened their visa rules, so many Indian have migrated their on student visas. Quite a few of these "students" attend bogus fly-by-night universities to get permanent residence in NZ/Australia. Most of these fradulent students are rural Punjabis. These students have developed a reputation for being sexually perverse and harassing white women quite a bit. To the extent that Aussies and Kiwis now associate Indian men with sexual deviancy, whereas in the past Indians were seen as thrifty, industrious, and well behaved.

Ask any Australian or New Zealander commenter here. They'll tell you that around the last few years, Indian men have developed a very sexually sleazy reputation in both countries. Thanks to the Punjabis.

In Australia, many women won't ride in taxi cabs anymore because Punjabi cabbies are committing large numbers of sexual assaults and molestation.

http://forums.ratedesi.com/showthread.php?t=335398

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/we-cant-ignore-the-reality-of-cab-attacks-20130920-2u56s.html#ixzz2noHHx36s

In New Zealand, Indians are being barred from night clubs because a lot of Punjabi men show up and act excessively lewdly toward women.

http://www.massivemagazine.org.nz/blog/12022/famous-nightclub-owner-posts-ban-on-indian-rapists/

If tomorrow America were to open its border to all immigrants, there'd be a huge flood of Punjabi migrants here........ and the reputation of Indians would quickly go from doctor/IT/math-genius to pervert/deviant/molester.

In India, one reason Delhi has so many sexual assault cases is because it's full of Jats from Punjab and Harayana. Bombay, which has far fewer Jats, is comparatively safe.

In the UK, Pakistani Punjabis have engaged in a huge number of cases of child molestation and prostitution.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/06/09/child-grooming-pakistani-men_n_3412594.html

David said...

>Every White person in a multiracial society has had many "uncomfortable racial moments".<

To say the least. It's clear Mehta didn't grow up around American blacks, and probably has little experience of average American blacks now.

Some pale Untouchable cracks a Civil War joke and Little Lord Fauntlegupta holds a grudge all his life? What would Mehta be like if a country club had denied his request for membership? I shudder to think of it.

Desi Pride World Wide! said...

"which he resents calling by its new Hindu nationalist name of Mumbai"

- Mumbai is neither new nor Hindu Nationalist. Its the original name of that area. The British had difficulty prounouncing it.

Mehta's book Maximum City was a good read but I've not read anything else by him.

I want to thank you Steve for pointing out the ridiculous hypocrisy of his article here. I'll have to research him some more now that I've read it because it seems he might fit into a particular mold of a self-loathing "liberal" Desi (South Asian) who plays both sides.

These are so-called "modern" and "global" Indians who stir up controversy in both their countries of origin as well as their adopted countries (and everywhere else they go if truth be told).

In India they bash Hinduism, our great ancient civilization and our traditional/indigenous cultures, while they pander to and kiss the backsides of our minorities (Christians and Muslims).

They even sometimes go so far as to support foreign Christian missionaries (a front for Marxist separatism) in India!!!

Then over here in the US they play the same game but with different Chess figures.

I recommend you read the book BREAKING INDIA: Western Interventions in Dravidian and Dalit Faultines by Rajiv Malhotra if you really wish to penetrate the psyche of this type of self-loathing, culturally deracinated, Westernized, "modern, global" Indian.

Desi Pride World Wide! said...

Silver, "When we got to his house my friend told his younger brother (about eight) about it. The brother laughed and shook his head knowingly, "F--n wogs."


- A child that young using the "f" word is also disturbing. Is that common in Australia?

"No way, no how would an Indian in the 80s have experienced racism, get real," which is obviously silly.

- Forget the '80s, I've experienced racism today in the "new" millenium. But it wasn't any more severe than the racism I may have dished out knowingly or unknowingly to others (we all have our biases) so.... its the fruit of my own karma.

Anonymous about Punjabis. I'm Indian. Not Punjabi (though I have a few in my extended family). There is a drug problem in the state of Punjab and Punjabis have the reputation as being "the most Westernized" in India itself so I'm not surprised to hear them carrying on shamelessly in Canada as if they have no Indian culture and no Indian values.

They also have, deservedly or not, a reputation for a few other undesirable traits which I won't elaborate on here.

I've read a lot about Pakistani Muslim guys in the UK "grooming" Anglo teens and my main takeaway was: why are Anglo parents such slackers at parenting. Many of the cases I read about were girls from single parent homes and "care homes". But even the ones living in a two-parent household, the fathers expressed helplessness at being able to control the movements of their own daughters!

This is unfathomable to me.

Basically its a case of these Muslim guys not having access to the girls from their own community, because, well, PROPER PARENTING, and so they go where they know parenting doesn't exist and kids are allowed to do whatever they want with whomever they want at whatever time of day.

If those girls had "tiger moms" no way would they be hanging out with those dudes.

Instead they've got single cougars for moms.

Oswald Spengler said...

Desi Pride World Wide! said...

"These are so-called 'modern' and 'global' Indians who stir up controversy in both their countries of origin as well as their adopted countries (and everywhere else they go if truth be told)."

"In India they bash Hinduism, our great ancient civilization and our traditional/indigenous cultures, while they pander to and kiss the backsides of our minorities (Christians and Muslims)."

----------------------------------

It sounds like "modern" or "global" Indians are the SWPLs of the South Asian Subcontinent.

Silver said...

His "era"? What, those ancient shameful days of Jawaharlal Crow? We're talking about the '80s.

That's cute, Rohan, but what you are doing is taking a perfectly good case - "immigration/diversity insanity" - and ruining it by trying to make it a perfect case. The impression your remark gives is "Look at these hate-filled racists, they can't even admit that attitudes towards racial difference have changed since the 1980s." Really, some of the stuff you hardliners come up with is no better than the "Did you know Asians eat dogs?!" hysteria I remember as a kid. Okay, so they eat dogs. That's a lot more likely to prompt reflection on the varieties of culinary preference across cultures than it is to inspire a man to shut down the borders and deport the Asians already here.

Desi Pride World Wide! said...

Mehta: "I want them to know why we came here and how we found our place in this new land. I want them to know about the teachers at the Catholic school in Queens who called me a "pagan," and the boy there who welcomed me to the school by declaring, "Lincoln shoulda never let 'em off the plantations," and the landlord who welcomed us to the country by turning off the electricity."


Steve: "In other words, the most important family memories that my sons are having inculcated in them is that they are Victims of Whites."

- Steve, I wouldn't assume all those accounts were from whites. His landlord may not have been white and the Catholic teachers may not have been either.

I question why the heck his parents would put him in a Catholic school here in the States?! Well to be fair the Catholic schools in India are not that bad (but that is because they are in a Hindu majority country), so his parents were probably thinking the Catholic schools here were similar.

Of course at the time the US was Christian majority so they had to expect they'd be faced with some ignorance regarding Hinduism and should have prepared their son for such (by not putting him in a Christian school, for one).

I would have proudly explained I was Hindu and asked to give a class presentation on the similarities and differences between South Asian Hinduism and European Paganism, but of course that's probably too much to expect of a young kid.

I guess I came at the right time. Americans are presently fascinated by Hinduism and South Asian culture and philosophy in general so I have a lot of really nice exchanges with people here.

But then again I'm not hanging out in churches. But then again, neither are Americans anymore ;)

Silver said...

- A child that young using the "f" word is also disturbing. Is that common in Australia?

To be honest I'm not entirely certain the kid used the f-word. He may have just shook his head. But the father used to drop f-bombs in front of the children all the time so maybe that's why I remember the kid as having used it. I know I was using it by the age of seven or so.

Desi Pride World Wide! said...

Sorry to hear you were using the f word so young, Silver.

I take issue with Willis's comment reposted here;

"Anonymous 9:33 AM has an excellent point. Focus on the history of oppression *in America* (e.g., every Leftiy's favorite Howard Zion book) is all about using white guilt as a political weapon. I'm a white guy born in the US in the late 70s, yet somehow I'm responsible for Jim Crow, slavery, various battles with the Indians, Japanese internment, and the Chinese Exclusion Act; I'm even responsible for the Holocaust, apparently - especially the S.S. St Louis.

Never mind that I wasn't alive for any of it, may not have approved of any of it if I had been alive, nor that my ancestors actually fought for the Union in the Civil War. I'm required to feel guilt for all of it.

But a Haitian or Punjabi or Nigerian or Yemeni or Sinhalese or Chinaman who just moved here yesterday bears no portion of the blame for what happened in his lifetime, in his country, while inheriting a mess of grievances against me for things which happened long before my birth.

Guilt is nothing more than a political weapon."

- History cannot be revised to protect your feelings, Willis. If you feel "guilty" or any kind of way about what people did in the past, that's on you. But don't expect the history not to be told. That's ridiculous.

I remember telling one American woman about some of the atrocities meted out against Indians during the British Raj and SHE got all defensive. She wasn't even of Anglo ethnic descent!

What gives?

Cail Corishev said...

The situation here isn't that someone was interviewing this guy and asked whether he'd ever experienced racism as a child, so he said yeah and described a couple of instances. He brought it up as a major part of the narrative he's using to teach his children what the country of their birth is about. He wants to be sure to pass that along, to make sure they grow up with a sense of resentment against a country that didn't want them and did nothing to help them.

That's why we're poking fun. It's not that we don't think he ever experienced racism; everyone living in a racially non-homogeneous situation has. It's because he's trying to sell a wealthy Indian version of the Victim Narrative, and the best he can come up with is that some people at his elite private school said some ignorant things.

Cail Corishev said...

The condescension, the pro-India concern trolling...I'm starting to think Dr. Van Nostrand is back with a new moniker and a hipper, more in-your-face attitude.

Harry Baldwin said...

The Adam Carolla - Gavin Newsom colloquy is one of the best things you'll ever hear.

rec1man said...

Bottledwater said...
I don't know about Britain, but I can assure that in America no person has ever, not even once, confused an Indian with a black.

A muscular/fat dark skinned Indian with a shaved head will be confused for black all the time in America

-

In one of Razib's blogs, there is a joke about a white girl confusing a shaven head tamil for a black and then being unpleasantly surprised by small size of genitals

Anonymous said...

silver are you greek?

Anonymous said...

Oh boy. Revisionist history. Here we go again...the loving, benevolent slave owner and the kindhearted white society that warmly welcomed and took in this uncivilized group of people.

The last sentence -- "And in America, blacks rape whites, Asians, and Hispanics, but whites and Asians do better than blacks -- was all you wanted to say. The prior language describing the history of rapes perpetrating by other groups was a set-up to make your last and only point (black Americans are an inferior group that rapes) palatable.

But I, and hopefully many others, see through this. Nice try!

Rohan Swee said...

Silver: The impression your remark gives is "Look at these hate-filled racists, they can't even admit that attitudes towards racial difference have changed since the 1980s."

Great. Not lying about the very recent past about which one has first hand personal experience and knowledge, or expressing healthy skepticism toward claims of victimization that don't pass the smell test and also just happen to be currently fashionable and profitable, is now enough to qualify one as a "hate-filled racist".

Attitudes toward racial differences have not, as a matter of fact, changed all that much since the 1980s, as the '80s weren't "racist". If they were Mr. Mehta wouldn't have to be milking a couple of lame slurs to establish his victim cred.

Anthony said...

"But we also benefited from numerous advantages--from cultural capital built up over generations to affirmative action to an established network of connections in our new country--none of which had anything to do with racial, ethnic or cultural superiority."

Um, "cultural capital built up over generations" and "an established network of connections" have nothing to do with cultural superiority? What's he smoking?

Anonymous said...

Do you care about the 1 million female infants who are murdered by their own parents EVERY YEAR TODAY in very cruel ways in India, "Desi Pride?"

Or is your outrage selectively only for something Westerners did hundreds of years ago?

What a HYPOCRITE! 1 million female babies a year slaughtered like kittens TODAY and you whine about Hooters waitresses!

Take your vomit-inducing HYPOCRISY and go back to your SUPERIOR "South Asian" culture where parents murder their own children like unwanted kittens or puppies!

J.R. Ewing said...


So it seems at least 250,000 US docs should be Indian. To put it another way one in every twelve Indians in the US should be a doc.


Actually that does sound right. My mom knows a lot of Indians so I just now asked her to name off the top of her head, the first 12 Indian friends she could think of. I then went through her list and asked how many were doctors. One of the twelve is a chiropractor and two others were pharmacists. Mind you we're Canadian, not American, and we're upper middle class, so our social circle is a little skewed, but it's rare to see an Indian who doesn't perform well above the Canadian average in both school and life (money). Achievements that would make you the star of a white family, just make you average in an Indian family, and achievements considered average in a white family, make you a pariah in an Indian family.

Marc B said...

"And among Cubans, there's a subset that hasn't done well: the "Marielitos," who immigrated in 1980 when Fidel Castro emptied the island's prisons"

"They were much darker in complexion than the first wave of Cubans"

No shit, Sherlock! The answer is in the question itself. A criminal class of any group would never be expected to rise to the top. You would be surprised if they did.

Anonymous said...

I am Asian-American, thoroughly westernized to the extant that the only language is English.

Growing up in small-town America, I was regularly subjected to racial taunts from other kids. However, as an adult, the only taunts I have received have all been from blacks - total strangers in urban areas no less.

Now that I am middle-aged and live in San Francisco, of course I haven't encountered this for many years. But, the memories still grate and produce reflexive bad feelings when I deal with blacks in casual situations.

Anonymous said...

Mumbai is neither new nor Hindu Nationalist. Its the original name of that area. The British had difficulty prounouncing it.


Hindu nationalists could not build a world city like Bombay so they renamed it Mumbai. Bombay was built by the British and Parsis and no amount of Hindu revisionis history can refute it.

Anonymous said...

I would like to congratulate "Desi Worldwide Pride"for copying the No True Scotsman fallacy with regard to his own people.

No True Indian would... (fill in nasty activity) unless, of course, Westernized.

Almost like pirating code...

as said...

I didn't read Mehta's article. I was afraid to.

Mehtas are pretty bad. I guess most of us Indians are as well.

Anonymous said...

@Desi Pride

"I've read a lot about Pakistani Muslim guys in the UK "grooming" Anglo teens and my main takeaway was: why are Anglo parents such slackers at parenting."

So it's okay to gang-rape children if their parents suck? What about orphans? Why don't you give us a list of what children it is okay to gang-rape.

.

"I remember telling one American woman about some of the atrocities meted out against Indians during the British Raj and SHE got all defensive. She wasn't even of Anglo ethnic descent!"

The critical point is it is only white people who fall for this collective guilt tactic which is why it is used against us.

Eurowhite people need to ask - mentally at least - if the person using the tactic accepts collective guilt applies to their group too as a kind of mental warding.

Anonymous said...

Indians have plenty to be ashamed of collectively. Their cohorts murder 1 million female babies per year. These are not sex-selective abortions but actual, living, breathing female babies who are murdered by methods that have been passed down in families like other (non-Indian) families pass down recipes! They drown female infants like unwanted kittens! Even Africans don't do things like that. Indians are sick, sick people and what's more, they KNOW IT. That's why they are always bragging about how great they are. Deep down they know that the rest of the world is appalled at their sick culture and let's face it, you have to be pretty bad if even AFRICANS think of you as filthy and uncivilized.

occidental observer said...

"Nah, the true model minority are the Japanese. They are chill and Americanized through and through"

I totally agree. It's hard to believe we were enemies in WWII. They are different from other Asians, though I don't know how that shows in their genetic relatedness. They just seem very different.

Anonymous said...

Here is a genuine question, very un-PC:

What is the odor that permeates non-Americanized Indians? Walk into an el-cheapo Indian-owned motel (which I have done many times in my younger, poor days)and there is this overwhelming acrid, sweat-laced, fetid scent permeating every crevice.

It is not curry cooking. It is not B.O., since that can't possibly cover every inch of the motel grounds. The westernized Indians don't have it.

So, what is it?

wander said...

"They drown female infants like unwanted kittens! "

I was browsing in my univ. library yrs ago when I picked up a book about India written by a British ex-pat. He recalled a conversation w/an Indian gentleman (don't recall caste, but definitely not Muslim) who said his father has sent word that if the new baby was a girl, to do away with it. Well, one night the Indian gentleman (his dad was still away) was summoned to the childbirth chamber where a newborn girl was placed briefly in his arms -- he was only about 8, but a male member of the family had to hold the girl and give consent. Then the midwife took two jars of icy water that had been left up on the roof (in case the baby was a girl; they thought ahead). The midwife then poured the water over the baby's face, which turned blue before she died in her brother's arms. The mother was haunted by this (it was not the only daughter murdered) and towards the end of her life, had nightmares where her murdered children attacked her with sharp objects.

I know that infanticide was sometimes necessary to control the population, but at least the Chinese just drowned or suffocated the infant. The creativeness of some of the Indian methods (the one described above was among the milder) is horrifying. They actually seem to torture the baby to death.
Of all the cultures, the Indians have the least to gloat over, however, advanced they may have been 3000 yrs ago (whoever they were then.)

Anonymous said...

"remember telling one American woman about some of the atrocities meted out "

They didn't "met out" many atrocities. In fact, they passed laws against child marriage (as early as the 1840s), female infanticide, and suttee. There weren't enough Brits to commit "atrocities" anyway. There were millions of Indians in India. Very few English.
Even after the 1857 mutiny, when Indians committed quite a few atrocities against whites, (BiBi Gar for example), Queen Victoria sent word for the British not respond with similar atrocity. She was not totally heeded and was disturbed by revenge atrocities, but these were restrained compared to what they could have been.
Massacres by British were rare. They had to be. Most massacres in India are Indian vs. Indian.

Anonymous said...

They are different from other Asians, though I don't know how that shows in their genetic relatedness. They just seem very different.
--
Most Japanese have significant amount of indigenous (Ainu)ancestry. Google what Ainu people looked like a hundred years ago, before massive intermarriage with Asiatics, and you will have your answer.

Hint: they were tall, had long noses, body hair, round eyes, and very fair skin.

Anonymous said...

In 2010, it was India's turn to host the "Commonwealth Games" which are Olympic Games for former members of the British Empire. The accommodations they provided to the visiting athletes were so filthy that most refused to stay in them. And NOTE< these were visiting athletes from OTHER Third World countries, like Nigeria and Sri Lanka. Pictures of the accommodations showed bathrooms with human shit smeared on the floors. The Indians could not understand why the visiting athletes saw their accommodations as dirty and disgusting. Also, a former ambassador to India from The Netherlands created an international incident when he complained about India's unrelenting filth.

Anonymous said...

Here's an article about the 2010 Commonwealth Games and the "sh*tty" accommodations provided by India:

http://netballscoop.com/forums/topic/disgusting-village-sparks-commonwealth-games-crisis/

quote: "Toilets in particular are said to be in a “mess”.

The newspaper said the apartments, which are left unlocked through the day and night, were found to be dirty.

In some flats, labourers had defecated."

Toilets. It's always toilets with Indians, isn't it? They just can't DO sanitation. They seem to LOVE pooping in places where no human poop should ever be found. I can't wait until they start pooping in the middle of Times Square or Market Street in S. F. So much "enrichment" to look forward to, isn't there?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 218   Newer› Newest»