Jump to content

USUrobert

Members
  • Content count

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About USUrobert

  • Rank
    Beginner

Profile Information

  • Team
    Utah State

Recent Profile Visitors

4,962 profile views
  1. Jatis- clans associated around certain professions existed and absolutely were endogamous. A hierarchical system of five castes (varnas) based on ancient Hinduism was not employed until British censuses required respondents to identify as one of the five. I don't think you can separate the success of British industrialization from colonialism as the markets and raw materials colonialism provided were instrumental in its success. Poor living standards are generally associated with high population growth. Per capita GDP across the world was fairly even prior to the industrial revolution. I'm not arguing that India was once a much wealthier nation, but colonialist practices (which include enriching a small local elite) certainly have had an effect on it and other colonized nations' development. And cheers to you too. I don't typically post here but enjoy reading informative posts like the ones above.
  2. A structured caste system as it's commonly understood in the West didn't really exist in India until it was instated by the British. Although effects of the caste system on economic productivity are being overstated here, colonialism further hindered productivity as it promoted caste divisions as a governance strategy. British tarriff and taxation policies killed the Indian textile industry more quickly than the industrial revolution would have and it's possible, although not a certainty, that without colonial interference India would have industrialized on its own, as Japan did, due to market forces.
  3. White Nationalist Rally in Virginia

    The Salon article is based off of a Reuters poll, the Vox one on an academic paper by UMass PoliSci professors, the Mother Jones' was by The Nation Institute.
  4. White Nationalist Rally in Virginia

    The poll, conducted between March and June, interviewed 16,000 Americans and included 21 questions on attitudes about race. It sought responses from voters who support Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, Clinton, the presumptive Democratic nominee, and her rival U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders. It also surveyed supporters of U.S. Senator Ted Cruz and Ohio Governor John Kasich, the last two Republican candidates to drop out of the race… To be sure, not all Trump supporters expressed negative attitudes about blacks. No more than 50 percent of his supporters rated blacks negatively, relative to whites, on any of the six character traits in the poll. Yet when their answers to the poll questions were compared with responses from supporters of other candidates, Trump supporters were always more critical of blacks on personality traits, analysis of the results showed. http://www.salon.com/2016/07/06/the_disturbing_data_on_republicans_and_racism_trump_backers_are_the_most_bigoted_within_the_gop/ Since 1988, we’ve never seen such a clear correspondence between vote choice and racial perceptions. Finally, the statistical tool of regression can tease apart which had more influence on the 2016 vote: authoritarianism or symbolic racism, after controlling for education, race, ideology, and age. Moving from the 50th to the 75th percentile in the authoritarian scale made someone about 3 percent more likely to vote for Trump. The same jump on the SRS scale made someone 20 percent more likely to vote for Trump. Racial attitudes made a bigger difference in electing Trump than authoritarianism. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/04/17/racism-motivated-trump-voters-more-than-authoritarianism-or-income-inequality/?utm_term=.b8c83c56bd4e “We find that while economic dissatisfaction was part of the story, racism and sexism were much more important and can explain about two-thirds of the education gap among whites in the 2016 presidential vote,” the researchers write. https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/1/4/14160956/trump-racism-sexism-economy-study The results, displayed in the chart below, show that probability of support for Trump increases sharply with negative views on rising diversity, and positive views towards diversity decrease the probability of voting for Trump. Interestingly, these attitudes have no significant effect on probability of voting for Romney or McCain. https://newrepublic.com/minutes/133447/donald-trumps-supporters-idiots For example, among the influencers using the hashtag #BanIslam, 84 percent followed Trump and 23 percent followed Cruz. Among those using #WhiteGenocide, 65 percent followed Trump and 10 percent followed Cruz. And among those using the neo-Nazi term “holohoax,” 44 percent followed Trump and 4 percent followed Cruz. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/donald-trump-hate-groups-neo-nazi-white-supremacist-racism/
  5. I enjoy reading both of their posts, but I don't understand jack's feud with lofazzs, whom I consider to be one of the most underrated posters on here.
×