site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   36684 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 11, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I work with many competent British-born Indians on a regular basis and find them friendly, hardworking, trustworthy and generally good coworkers. I think accusations of particular nepotism are unwarranted.

Increasingly I think every tribe is clearly nepotistic. Tribe, not race. White British or white Americans nepotistic aren’t nepotistic on an ethnic-group-wide level because if you’re in-group nepotistic at 70% of the population then nepotism isn’t really a filter at all. Go to Hong Kong or Singapore, though, and you’ll certainly find networks where Englishmen and so on will network and hire each other no differently to Indians in San Francisco or Chinese in London.

Indeed anyone in finance in London will have encountered, for example, the terrifyingly effective Italian and Turkish nepotistic networks, not to mention the ex (British military) officers corps network, which is of course almost 100% comprised of upper and upper-middle class native men. These things are everywhere. The only reason why some (ahem) are more effective than others is because their baseline intelligence is higher.

>ask if the abstract property is kiki or bouba
>he laughs. "It's a good property, sir"

Just thinking out loud here, really. I've had various dealings with Indians.

First of all, I'll freely admit that every Indian doctor I've encountered has been at least competent even if the bedside manner often leaves something to be desired. They often seem more disrespectful to their patients (or at least me) than doctors of other races, which I imagine has to do with how social status is understood in their culture generally.

In the corporate environment it's a very different dynamic. The Indians I've worked with are often spectacularly incompetent and, worse, preternaturally skilled at covering this up by spoofing the impression of a sincere, genuine colleague. It's frankly very creepy. Like they've modeled us whites, know how to exploit our good nature, recognize that they're intrinsically worse, and have zero shame in faking us out while leading us into situations where we're completely screwed and they're incrementally better off. It makes my skin crawl. After enough of this one is sadly obliged to develop a thick wall of prejudice simply for barely-minimal self defense. Chinese are often the same way except somewhat more reluctant because, I think, they realize they're less-convincing. Perhaps I might say that Chinese are smarter about modeling the future and not being too brazen in their duplicity? Whereas Indians often seem totally oblivious to the possibility that we might catch on to them, which adds a measure of insult to the injury. But, you know, they promote each other, so somehow this never seems to catch up to them.

There's some deep ancestral memory, some terror and hatred, of things which mimic benign features of the environment while actually intending to have us for dinner. Indians often push that button for me harder than I can believe.

When dealing with Indian business proprietors, based on the way they look at me and treat me, I'm often unable to shake the impression that they don't even recognize me as basically human. I'm a resource and they'd step over me as I die in a gutter as soon as they'd rent me a (cattle-car tier) hotel room or sell me a bottle of water. Again, it's creepy. But less so than corpo-Indians, since at least these ones have dropped the pretense. It's a bit strange that this should bother me. I'm engaging in a simple economic transaction; why should there be an expectation of mutual respect and friendliness? But again the sensation is that they know I'm dumb enough to assume good faith and have zero compunction about punishing that as hard as they can. Defect-bots. Namaste, indeed!

It can be almost cartoonish. They can be so unsubtle about it, and yet so simultaneously inept, that they remind me of the stock character of 'adorably incompetent pint-sized would-be villain'. Except it's not so adorable when you remember how few safeguards are actually in place. Not so cute when you walk through an area with dozens of dark eyes in dark faces tracking your every movement, calculating. When the pretender who's been holding back your whole team is suddenly your boss, and when did all the management start looking just like him? One of them is a curiosity; an opportunity to cultivate patience and compassion, with a side of smug self-satisfaction to boot. Many of them is a threat.

One oddity I've noted is that Indian men seem much worse about all this than Indian women. The Indian women I've met do generally seem to be nicer people and don't set off my "you are being eaten" alarm to anywhere near the same degree. I don't know whether the difference is fundamental or some kind of observation bias thing. I've also never actually worked with an Indian woman. Someday I'll probably find out what's going on here.

So all that plus the general impression of filthiness (caste-dependent, I'm sure) and I'm not surprised that there is some backlash. Frankly I think they're overdue for much, much more. Given time, even quokkas must evolve an aversion to predators.

EDIT: You know, I'd like to take a moment and clarify that while I've known plenty of lovely Indian men, they have universally been extremely high-caste. Obviously 'Indian' is an even worse category than 'Italian' for sorting people. But, that's the category we're using until people wake back up to the reality of race.

Nothing much to add other than this matches my experience.

Just in my own experience what makes anti-Indian racism different from other forms is that it faces less social censure in places where racism is normally taboo, particularly from women. I think any woman that posts photos of herself on social media has probably experienced some "noticing" that online sexual harassment she receives is not equally perpetrated by all ethnicities. I think women play a big role in defining social taboos and have carved out an exception for Indian men that you notice in places like Reddit. I think this is evidenced by the fact that I never notice any hostility towards Indian women (outside of some fringe places like the Motte where their frequent HR-style wokeness is noticed).

Source: See "send bobs and vegana" meme which IIRC predates all the focus on Indian scammers.

The recent huge, unprecedented influx of low-intelligence Indians into Canada, IMO, plays a huge role in the spread of the "pajeet" stereotype.

  1. Sexual harassment. There are all these newspaper headlines coming out of India about animals being raped to death, women who go there instantly regretting their decision. Or on university campuses at home women complain. We are the ones who invented #metoo and expended great effort getting Afghan girls into university, this does not go down well at all.
  2. A certain attitude. The Chinese probably do much more scamming than India but they're stealing turbine information, IP, software, schematics. They don't tend to go after grandma's savings saying they're from Microsoft. China comes off as threatening (nearly every day we have war propaganda in TV and newspapers against China). India is not threatening at all. But there's a certain kind of boasting/hypernationalism that you can see sometimes online, a certain level of entitlement to other people's money. Kitboga has done immense damage to India's reputation: https://youtube.com/watch?v=6m8Ln1yqeJE

There are all these newspaper headlines coming out of India about animals being raped to death, women who go there instantly regretting their decision.

I thought that was Pakistan, and I thought that was shown to be a hoax?

I dunno about the monitor lizard but there sure does seem to be a lot of it: https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/almost-5-lakh-animals-became-victims-of-crimes-in-last-10-years-in-india-report-1770190-2021-02-17

Pakistan certainly doesn't cover itself in glory either, on the rape front.

Do not redeem

I just imagine the devil saying that to Jesus.

I wanted to make a meme like that for rdrama.net around Easter time with the soy devil screaming DO NOT REDEEM to bloodied Chad Jesus wearing the crown of thorns but was too lazy. Anyways, there's always next year...

The casual scamming is really doing a number on perceptions of India like you say, and Kitboga is at least a little uncomfortable that people are noticing all his targets are Indians. I can't believe an entire country is so relaxed about being known as casual scammers, and will lash out at you if you criticize this behavior with whataboutisms or saying white people deserve it. It's like the country has taken the worst aspects of the left (obsession with race, hatred of whites, constant indignation) and the right (hypernationalism, also constant indignation) into a horrible synthesis.

I can't believe an entire country is so relaxed about being known as casual scammers

India is simply too massive. They have a smoldering Maoist insurgency that took them 50 years to suppress. It used to control more territory and people than most European states did and most people outside India have never heard of it. Phone scammers are a not even a blip on the internal Indian radar.

But there's a certain kind of boasting/hypernationalism that you can see sometimes online, a certain level of entitlement to other people's money.

I have to be circumspect, but in the course of practicing law, I've run across these types of clients who have a tendency to haggle about prices and rates from the start. And then once you've agreed on prices they will later on try to get discounts or write-offs, oftentimes by pointing out perceived flaws in the work or failures on the customer service side. And on some occasions just try to screw you over directly.

And when you notice that despite these people belonging to a group that is <10% of your clientele, they are like 80% of this specific type of problem client you encounter, it becomes bad enough that you kind of brace for it when you notice certain names associated with a certain ethnicity pop up.

Now, I have had entirely pleasant interactions and dealings with some of them, but adverse interactions are common enough that I can instantly recall the bad ones, and that can definitely feed into a bias.

Kitboga has done immense damage to India's reputation

Thanks to him, I cannot think about the word "redeem" without automatically associating it with India.

I wonder if the yelling scammer guy is aware of his own popularity.

There are scammers who are aware of Kitboga, so it's certainly a possibility.

a certain kind of entitlement to other people’s money

I know what you’re talking about, but I have to wonder to what extent it’s due to actual objective differences in the “national character”, or whether it’s due to my own political biases, or perhaps whether it’s due to America’s (my country of residence) geopolitical relationship with the countries in question.

India and China both come off to me as being notably entitled (not just in terms of “other people’s money”, but more broadly). But I don’t feel that way about Russia, or Japan, or Latin America, or basically anywhere else in the world.

The Chinese state comes off as super-sanctimonious, it's all 'you're racist oppressive imperialists obstructing our peaceful multilateral world order with your provocations and cold war mindset'. But internally you see a wide-ranging hatred of many foreign countries, especially Japan (not an unreasonable grudge, all things considered). They made some drunk captain a national hero when he rammed into a Japanese coast guard ship and caused a diplomatic incident. They constantly bitch about Japan releasing mildly irradiated water from Fukushima.

If they ever get the upper hand, I'm very glad to not be Japanese.

Incel forums and looksmaxxing becoming more mainstream plays a big part too. Most would use the term currycel for self-description with ricecel being for east asians. The oxford study results paint a grim picture for East Asians where it states that women of east asia are more likely to prefer dating people of other races with whites being highest rated, I would argue that the subcontinent and south-east Asia has the similar issues. Posters on incel forums would self-deprecate quite heavily, whilst I mention the shortcomings of people here sometimes, it is never me saying stuff like ethnic tax. Quite a lot of the info you see out there did come from these forums.

It's fascinating to me how every race seems to have romantic/sexual ethnic grievances. Every race has men who think they are getting the raw end of the deal. And yet, who is getting the better end of it?

There's always someone complaining about dating. Both males and females. Of all races.

White men , unlike Indians and Asians, don't complain about racial barriers specifically. The other groups have all of the standard grievances plus the feeling that their race is disfavored by the majority.

So they're probably the winners, as a race.

@SophisticatedHillbilly

White men probably do objectively best as a race, but there's this constant undercurrent of sexual jealousy towards especially black men. It's a pretty constant genre of pornography, and a common cultural watchword. This despite all the objective success!

sexual jealousy towards especially black men. It's a pretty constant genre of pornography, and a common cultural watchword

It's not about dating and forming relationships, though. Pure animalistic sexual attraction.

Can you even picture a cuck soy enough to say out loud the phrase "Yeah she just wants to fuck you when she's young and wild, she'll marry me!" And think he's winning that argument?

Further on this very forum I've read people write about the Coal Toll, white men refusing to date girls who sleep with black men.

There's a pretty clear dynamic of jealousy.

I doubt people watching interracial porn imagine themselves marrying the actress or even dating her.

I'm not sure what point you're making.

Objectively, pretty much just white men in the like 25-45 range (definitely blurry at the edges there) who are some combination of wealthyish, charismatic, and healthy (or maybe just agentic? I’ve always felt that was a bigger factor.)

If it truly is a situation of molochian hypercompetition, NOBODY is getting the "better" end of it. Everyone is working harder than ever for less reward than ever.

It's crab buckets everywhere, and any perception that it is better somewhere else is just grass is greener effect.

There's at least people getting the "less bad" end of it compared to each other, even if true "better" might be far in the past or future, and "white men in the like 25-45 range" does seem to be the least bad male demographic to be in. I long ago noticed in OKCupid blog data that men do have better odds as they get older, and looking now at the "Reply Rate by Race - Male Sender" graphic from the old OKCupid blog, it does look like white men had it less bad than other men - with nearly 30% of women they messaged willing to acknowledge they exist!

Disclaimer: all data above is at least 15 years old, OKCupid was since bought out for being too functional a competitor to commercial dating apps, and there is no reason to believe the descent away from "better" has abated. Even limiting our complains to the situation of men seems myopic; women hardly seem much happier with modern dating, with very different but similarly serious complaints.

"white men in the like 25-45 range" does seem to be the least bad male demographic to be in.

In terms of dating and mating success I bet this is true. But I think the sharp understated problem is that the more success they achieve, the greater their overall risk becomes, too!

That is, white men will likely have more to lose/further to fall from getting me-tooed, divorced, or arrested.

To put it bluntly, losing a few billion dollars in a divorce is a patently absurd, and extremely harsh outcome, and even if we admit that it doesn't render the guy destitute.

And that's what white males, (almost every male, really) are sensitive to. Their success built over years or decades being threatened by picking the wrong woman or running afoul of the wrong social group. Because those are the conditions everyone currently operates under.

And no this isn't a "won't somebody PLEASE think of the Wealthy WASP guys?" post. Its a "if it can happen to them, it can happen to ANYBODY" post.

So yes, I'd grant white guys are going to have it better ("less worse"), but they're not escaping the conditions that are plaguing everyone.

To put it bluntly, losing a few billion dollars in a divorce is a patently absurd, and extremely harsh outcome, and even if we admit that it doesn't render the guy destitute.

Bezos didn’t lose billions of dollars. It was their money and it was divided in a divorce settlement. Losing a big chunk of the fortune you were able to accumulate because your wife was loyal enough to support you into building a business that turned into the most profitable one in the world is a fair penalty for deciding to cheat on her.

It was their money and it was divided in a divorce settlement. Losing a big chunk of the fortune you were able to accumulate because your wife was loyal enough to support you into building a business that turned into the most profitable one in the world is a fair penalty for deciding to cheat on her.

Is it, though? The law says that she is entitled to some percentage of what he earned/acquired during the marriage. But that law presumably was not written with billionaires in mind.

As far as I understand divorce law (admitting it varies between states), the goal is to ensure that the less endowed spouse is not left destitute and is given enough support to live approximately the lifestyle they enjoyed during the marriage for the foreseeable future. Punishing the other spouse is not really part of the calculation.

I think $100 mil would be more than sufficient for that purpose. Maybe you disagree.

And regardless, the message this sends to guys is that they can lose enormous chunks of wealth in a divorce (and thanks to no-fault, the cheating part is optional!) and so they probably shouldn't risk getting married if their assets are considerable.

And regardless, the message this sends to guys is that they can lose enormous chunks of wealth in a divorce (and thanks to no-fault, the cheating part is optional!) and so they probably shouldn't risk getting married if their assets are considerable.

Bezos married Scott before founding Amazon; his wealth was made while he was married to her.

I'm not certain if you're arguing that she was a critical part of creating the wealth and therefore deserves a large cut (i.e. he wouldn't have succeeded if he wasn't married to her) or if you're just saying that the law states she gets a chunk as long as they were married long enough, ergo it is just dandy that she gets what the law says she gets.

The position "a woman can be married to you a long time and then leave and take a huge chunk of your wealth with her" isn't very encouraging, on its own.

the fortune you were able to accumulate because your wife was loyal enough

What do you think each of their value over replacement spouse is?

That’s not what divorce settlements are designed to calculate.

Can we agree to call that debatable?

No. Bezos’ wife number one was a key part of him being able to build Amazon; she has a legitimate partial claim on the fortune and it’s not like she divorced him because she felt like it.

When you say she was key, do you mean she was significantly involved in the leadership or funding of Amazon, or do you mean in terms of general love and support?

The latter is generally underrated, but I doubt it was necessary or sufficient for Bezos to found Amazon.

Not knowing more, I would be fine with the wife getting ‘live in reasonable comfort for the rest of your life’ money and I would be fine stoning Bezos for adultery, but I don’t see that divorce qualifies her for ownership of his fortune.

More comments

The rap is mostly, from my experience, a consequence of outsourcing. The Pajeet frustration comes from three things:

  • I'm having a problem with my internet connection. I ring up my ISP, who have outsourced their call centre to India because it's cheaper. I now have to deal with someone who barely speaks English, in an incomprehensible accent, and who cannot for any reason deviate from the script in front of them to actually deal with my problem because they don't have the language command needed to go off script. This is not a Good Experience.

  • I'm at work. A large part of our project has now been outsourced to India, because it's cheaper. I now have to deal with the same lack of English as before, but this time I'm chasing them up for deliverables. I ask if the work has been done. Pajeet says yes it has, of course it has. I ask where it is and can I have it. Pajeet says actually no it hasn't been done, he's very sorry and he'll get it done right now. Why do they just lie about things which will get exposed instantly?!?! This is not a Good Experience either.

  • The third thing is, of course, all the fucking scammers.

Anecdotally as well, the only time I, a (kind of feminine) male, have ever been sexually harassed by a man was in a hotel in Paris, by an Indian porter, in a lift, and he also smelled like actual shit. I know that's just an anecdote, but it makes me more willing to believe the stories of others.

The oxford study results paint a grim picture for East Asians where it states that women of east asia are more likely to prefer dating people of other races with whites being highest rated, I would argue that the subcontinent and south-east Asia has the similar issues

The silver lining, for South Asian men, is that white men generally aren't nearly as attracted to South Asian women as to East Asian women.

Interesting, I think this is an Anglo thing? In the US Asian Indians are the top earning ethnicity, even wealthier than jewish ethnicity, and many tech CEO/managers are Indian. And in the UK the Tories get the Hindu vote, because they are richer than Muslim Pakistanis, and Rishi Sunak (who is upper class himself) was Prime Minister. Doesn’t this give social status? In Central Europe I think the stereotype is mildly positive/exotic, but there are not many Indians around.

I think negative sentiment towards Indians can be narrowed down to one dominant factor: the English language.

Indians are, what, 1 in 6 people on the planet? In the past this number didn't mean much as the vast majority rarely leave their home country, but the internet and outsourcing means you have a much greater chance to encounter Indians. The thing is, India's cultural issues and level of social niceties are no worse than any other developing nation. China has many of the same problems, with a vast underclass of people that have awful hygiene and manners, a massive scam industry, nepotism and dishonesty, and even the "incel" characteristics that are ascribed to indians can be found in many Chinese men.

But people will very rarely encounter Chinese people because they don't speak English. There are no Chinese call centres, and while there are plenty of English language Chinese scammers you are still much more likely to get a call from an Indian. And on the internet, the Chinese are essentially banned from many of the most popular Western sites, while Indians will likely soon become the majority on places like facebook, reddit, youtube, and tiktok. The majority of the time an average Westerner is encountering someone from China will be Chinese tourists, and they have a godawful reputation.

What's frustrating about Indians is their ubiquity combined with poor English skills. Tech forums are full of Indians answering questions with broken English that is painful to read and decipher. Call centres are staffed with Indians, many of whom mumble with thick accents and bad grammar.

Anti-Indian sentiment within the Anglosphere seems mostly confined to Canada and the UK, increasing in the former noticeably in the last few years because of the enormous ongoing immigration wave and diplomatic disputes over the relict Khalistan movement-in-exile. Indian-Americans are a cut above most other immigrant groups as far as education, income, and general "merit" go, even compared to Indians in other countries, so they don't tend to draw a lot of flak. Perhaps if India achieves a similar global status as China, Indians here will go from being ignored all the time to occasionally being harassed due to geopolitical events before being ignored again.

Is the whole race and dating thing really that fucked?

In the last few years the gender imbalances in interracial relationships seem to have evened out a bit in the US, at least with respect to Asians. I assume the increased prominence of Korean music and pop culture around the world had something to do with this. It will probably take popular perceptions a while to catch up and the stereotypes that were validated by the old OkCupid data are still alive and well, usually played for laughs but sometimes tinged with real resentment, particularly from the groups at the bottom of the totem pole i.e. Asian men and Black women.

Anti-Indian sentiment within the Anglosphere seems mostly confined to Canada and the UK

I haven't really seen much Anti-Indian sentiment in the UK (outside of hardcore EDL types, who don't like anyone not British). I don't have the numbers to hand but I'm pretty sure they're one of the highest earning, least criminal demographics over here.

Anti-Indian sentiment within the Anglosphere seems mostly confined to Canada and the UK

Indians are not a popular ethnicity among blue collar Americans.

In the last few years the gender imbalances in interracial relationships seem to have evened out a bit in the US, at least with respect to Asians. I assume the increased prominence of Korean music and pop culture around the world had something to do with this.

A lot of this is because the causes of the imbalances are starting to disappear: fewer Asian Americans are immigrants with poor linguistic and cultural fluency. Women, whether tourists or immigrants, get laid more easily in foreign countries because men don't value those things.

Various ethnic phenotypical stereotypes are less important than social status.

Anti-Indian sentiment within the Anglosphere seems mostly confined to Canada and the UK, increasing in the former noticeably in the last few years because of the enormous ongoing immigration wave and diplomatic disputes over the relict Khalistan movement-in-exile. Indian-Americans are a cut above most other immigrant groups as far as education, income, and general "merit" go, even compared to Indians in other countries, so they don't tend to draw a lot of flak.

Attitudes towards Indians are similarly positive in the UK, for the same reason. They are rich, well-educated, law-abiding. Like the Chinese they are considered model immigrants and usually vote Conservative.

Pakistanis are less popular, for reasons.

This is a legacy of the majority of British-Indians pre-2010 being relatively highly educated, often very highly educated, and generally well acclimatised. There were teething issues of course- black and white skinheads would team up to do a bit of 'paki bashing' that usually targeted brown people indiscriminately.

But 1 in 6 British Indians were of East African extraction (read, middleman minority) as late as 2001, with the remainder being largely merchant-class Gujaratis. Essentially the same stereotype and class of people as Indians in America.

These positive feelings will soon fade with the latest Boriswave. Vast numbers of single men working as deliveroo drivers do not a model minority make. Anecdotally, my 2nd Gen British-Indian friends used to mock and make fun of "freshies" (fresh off the boat people) for being crude, uneducated etc. when in reality most of them were visiting accountants from Bombay. Those mocking comments have largely stopped as I think they see that the the new wave of Indian migrants do fit all the stereotypes. An interesting dynamic to say the least. I don't see the positive attitude lasting, and I think sooner rather than later the 2nd and 3rd gen British Indians will get over their semi-ethnic solidarity and realise that these new arrivals are giving them a bad name, and advocate for their removal. Braverman/Patel gave this rhetoric at least, although their actions are questionable. Due to these largely being single men with unstable employment, they should be easy to remove with a bit of willpower. Not the same dynamic as established families and communities.

How imbalanced are the demographics of recent Indian immigrants to the UK? The statistics are presumably available.

I actually think these statistics are relatively difficult to get access to- the 2021 Census a) missed the large numbers of people who arrived 2021-2024 and b) almost certainly vastly undercounted. Roughly 3 million people have arrived in the country Jan 2021-Dec 2023 according to migration observatory, and most of these arrivals won't feature in the Census data, plus whatever the 2024 numbers are. The census estimated 1.9m Indians living in the UK in 2021. Between 2021-2023, the official preliminary numbers estimated 670,000 Indian nationals arrived on long term visas. Adding in people overstaying short term visas, plus the 2024 numbers, and 1 million total Indian arrivals since the Census took place looks reasonable. My 95% confidence interval for Indians in the UK would be 2.75m-3.5m, as I have no idea what the potential undercount might be. This doesn't include Sri Lankans, Nepalese, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis but does include 2nd and 3rd gens ticking the Indian ethnicity box.

Going just off the primary language census data (with the caveats noted above), Telugu, Malayalam, Marathi and Tamil speakers have seen the largest proportional increases since 2011. So mostly South Indians/Dravidians. The established languages have all either plateaued (Punjabi, Urdu) or fallen (Bengali, Gujarati) which probably reflects the maturation of these groups as their 2nd gen offspring use English as a main language. Of course Bengali, Urdu and Punjabi speakers are probably mostly of Bangladeshi or Pakistani origin.

I repeat that, anecdotally, very recent Indian migration in particular seems to heavily skew towards men. This might be a feature of where I live rather than for the whole of the UK. I can't find any stats to back this up, especially as trying to make estimates that don't factor in the 1m post-census arrivals would be redundant.

Whereabouts do you live? You’re probably correct but I wonder if it’s balanced out by large numbers of female NHS etc workers now that Filipinos and Poles are being joined by both Nigerians and Indians in larger numbers.

Quite possible, I live in one of the nice but not elite areas of zone 2. Demographically speaking it is probably similar to the other nicer parts of inner London, low in white British but relatively high in general white population via Americans/Europeans, more (2nd gen/upper class) Indians and Chinese than Pakistanis/Bangladeshis etc. My exposure to the recent arrivals then are mostly through service job interactions and the swathes of food delivery couriers, and the tube. I have practically 0 interaction with the NHS, so this could be correct. Nigerians I think are almost certainly more balanced demographically. Given the huge changes in HMO licensing and rental patterns, I don't think that these new mostly male Indian arrivals have wives or girlfriends at home, but rather live 8 to a flat with other single 20-something men. A lot of the time the landlords for these properties are themselves upper class and/or 2nd gen Indians who extract/exploit the maximum they can from these new tenants.

Take the recent scandal from Jas Athwal, the labour MP recently as a slum landlord in East London. Anecdotally, a property I used to rent a long time ago I saw has been converted from a 3 bed to a 5 bed (by turning everyone room except the kitchen and bathroom into bedrooms). The landlady is (unsurprisingly) a 2nd gen East African Gujarati who rotates between London/Dubai/Kenya. This is quite a common pattern that I have seen from parents of friends and colleagues.

Edit: of course the other possibility is that a similar but gender reversed situation is taking place with Indian women, where they live in large HMOs and all work in the NHS, in some kind of parallel world. But I don't think is happening, at least not on the same scale as the men.

Quite possible, I live in one of the nice but not elite areas of zone 2.

Are we talking like Islington / Maida Vale / Clapham tier, here?

Yeah, it’s interesting, natives are highly concentrated in the outer suburbs, the richest are strongly concentrated in Chelsea / Fulham / the immediate vicinity of The Surprise, with another large group slightly north around Holland Park / Notting Hill, and to some extent in Hampstead and leafier parts of North London (along with Jews and Indians).

Here in Mayfair there are almost no natives, it is predominantly Arabs, some Russians, Africans and Chinese (although the latter prefer Nine Elms / Battersea Power Station / South Bank Apartment buildings), and moderately large contingents of wealthy Americans, Italians and French (although in general French and Scandinavians prefer Marylebone), mostly young (men) who work in hedge funds or PE nearby. Marylebone also seems to have a lot of rich Aussies along with many Americans and a few Brits here and there, mostly older.

More comments

I think a lot of those anti-Indian posts on 4Chan are astroturfed. Both those and the interracial pornography posts all mysteriously go away every time Israel starts getting bombed. I have no idea how any of that stuff would be in Israel’s geopolitical interest, but it’s a known phenomenon.

Nothing speculated on by 4chan users is a "known phenomenon". It's just pattern matching and confirmation bias.

Augury is a viable means of gnosis if their results are anything to go by.

Check em'

It’s more likely to be Pakistanis and Arabs who are frequently racist toward Indians online. So much of this more vulgar racist posting on boards and in social media comments is perpetuated on all sides by non-Westerns.

I haven't really noticed it online, but I have noticed it in person. I live in a city that has received an enormous number of immigrants in a very short period of time, and they seem to be overwhelmingly from India, although some are from Africa and the Ukraine. This is a Canadian city that has not had much immigration since confederation. It used to be very white, with a small black population, a small indigenous population, and a very small population from elsewhere. The few Indian people we had tended to be very highly educated.

Very little changed here for a long time but it's now undergoing a rapid transformation. The population is booming, high rises are going up everywhere, rents are rapidly outgrowing incomes, and traffic congestion is getting really bad. People are blaming the immigrants, and Indians, with their dark complexions and jet black hair, really stand out. It seems like half the population dowtown is Indian now.

The other really visible change is that seemingly most low-skilled customer-facing jobs are now done by Indians. Almost every grocery store employee, Uber Eats driver, security guard, fast food restaurant worker, and call centre worker is Indian.

They're not really causing any serious problems, but there's beginning to be a bit of a backlash. People blame them for the high rents, and there is a belief that they're taking jobs better suited for teenagers when what we really need are doctors and tradesmen. This a very left-wing city with a strong norm against racism and I personally never witnessed much racism until recently, but a minority of people are starting to feel comfortable saying negative things about them and saying they should go back to India.

Much of this racism comes from Indians themselves though. They often don't like Indians from certain parts of India or from certain castes. Many think we're letting in too many or the wrong kinds. There seems to be a lot of conflict between different groups.

Much of this racism comes from Indians themselves though. They often don't like Indians from certain parts of India or from certain castes. Many think we're letting in too many or the wrong kinds. There seems to be a lot of conflict between different groups.

Yes, but it has to do with 'class' more than 'caste' or 'regionalism'. You've correctly observed that there are 2 different clusters of Indian immigrants.

The upper-middle class of India slogs their ass off to get into real Canadian universities and qualify for real jobs. These people come from around the country. This is your standard meritocratic group, a high HDI cluster. Then, a sub-section of no-skilled youths are practically trafficked into Canada by exploiting every loop hole imaginable. These people can't speak English, don't have jobs when they arrive here and live in squalor. This subsection primarily hails from Punjab. This is low HDI cluster.

The high HDI cluster hates the low HDI cluster.

Canadian visa abuse is an open-secret in India. It's not just the high HDI immigrant cluster who shit on these people. The whole country does.

I've heard Punjabis are wealthy because they own a lot of farmland.

Those Punjabis don't leave India.

Punjab used to be India's wealthiest state in the 80s, thanks for a booming agriculture sector. Then, they inflicted suicidally bad policy and a separatist insurgency onto themselves. Since then, Punjab hasn't recovered.

A minority that owns a lot of land, lives like kings back home. But Punjab never industrialized. So, small farms had no value and small farmers continued struggling. In contrast, the neighboring state of Haryana saw rapid urbanization, and small farmers there became mini-millionaires overnight. Haryanvis are culturally Punjabi, and sometimes identify as Punjabi in global circles.

When Indians talk about Punjabis, we mean the residents of the Indian state of Punjab. For comparison, Haryana is 5% Sikh, while Punjab is 60% Sikh. But, a global audience may not make that distinction.

It's frustrating to me, and I think other Canadians, that our government allowed this to happen. I can't stress enough how much it didn't have to be this way. We had a good thing going. We were a pro-immigrant country. We liked newcomers.

You see bar charts like this and it's just baffling. Even at the vastly increased rate of immigration over the last 4 years, you'd see less backlash if those bars had been kept more even.

I first noticed Indians about 15 years ago. Every single one I worked with was an H1B that almost certainly lied to get the job. In fact, I have never had a satisfactory experience working with an Indian in any position. I keep running into the same failure pattern where it's like they simply don't understand language, they just make convincing mouth sounds to get people to leave them alone. I've never successfully communicated a technical problem to an Indian in a way they've understood, no matter how hard I try. Other colleagues understand what I'm trying to communicate immediately.

My entire region was over ran by them. They all drove Honda Odysseys and basically didn't follow any traffic laws what so ever. At some point my then girlfriend, now wife with a confusing ethnic sounding last name got an interview at an American company that had been completely taken over by Indians. She was told point blank that they weren't going to hire her because she was white and they only hire other Indians. To this day she carries a grudge against Indians for being so nakedly discriminated against.

Later when she was venting to her father about the incident, he asked which company, and recognized the name. Said they were notorious for just blatantly lying on every contract bid they made, and basically doing no competent work what so ever.

I wouldn't say I'm shocked if people notice misbehavior that blatant and stereotypical.

I have never had a satisfactory experience working with an Indian in any position.

Fwiw pajeets at faang earn their keep. Probably because they need to actually pass a technical interviews to get in rather than just being able to con their way through informal interviews. But the blatant visa fraud mills give them all a bad name.

Said they were notorious for just blatantly lying on every contract bid they made, and basically doing no competent work what so ever.

Yes absolutely. Avoid them like the plague.

Probably because they need to actually pass a technical interviews to get in rather than just being able to con their way through informal interviews.

This has been my experience in (non-FAANG) engineering, although most of the South Asian ancestry engineers I've worked with have been citizens or at least permanent residents that studied at good schools in the US, so it's probably not a representative sample of the space. I've had no real complaints about working with them, and many have been quite talented and motivated.

It's because Indians have 2 pathways to come to the USA.

  1. high tier undergrad -> Masters -> FANG-ish job -> coastal T1 city -> upper middle / lower rich class dom.

  2. low tier undergrad -> Sweat shop consultancy-> H1b lottery spam -> T2/T3 American city -> temporary life of squalor to save a few dollars

The strong selection effects mean that your experience with an Indian in the US is likely to either either be quite positive (cracked FANG engineers) or quite negative (DGAF sweat shop workers).

Definitely some of that. More than a few have been second (or more) generation, and a couple of those have talked about working for their parent's classic immigrant businesses (gas stations, laundromats, that sort of thing), so I don't think their ancestors all arrived with high-tier degrees.

Honda Odysseys? The mini-van? Here, they're known for driving Honda Civics.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats