An exodus may be imminent in some Gujarat villages, where members of the Dalit community have alleged they are increasingly facing harassment, intimidation and violence at the hands of upper-caste communities and OBC communities.
“It will happen, if not today, then very soon,” says Somabhai, a resident of Rupal village in Gujarat’s Sabarkantha district, alleging that the upper-caste communities do not wish to see their community prosper.
On May 18, members of the Dalit community from villages in Sabarkantha district submitted a memorandum to the Resident Additional Collector at the district office in Himmatnagar demanding immediate intervention and protection from such atrocities.

I am a 12th grader from Mumbai. I went to my societies gym today and one aunty just brings up a conversation starts asking what floor I live on and stuff while we are 2-3 sentences into the conversation she asks "Caste kya hai" There was obviously no chance that I was going to reply with 'm@har' so I said "caste matlab?" then she just asked which state I am from and gave me a 30 min speech on what caste she is from and how muslims aren't allowed in this society and stuff.

How do y'all react when someone asks your caste?

I don't know how serious or satirical this "movement" might be, but I discovered it on YouTube, and it's basically this guy, Abhijit Dipke, who started a new party called Cockroach Janta Party, Cockroach because that's the term CJI used to describe our current generation/youth. I don't know if it's actually serious, but it got a lot of attention online and is now giving interviews with news TV channels. You can check out their manifesto on their website. Is this actually going to be something beneficial or just another Savarna slop?

I’m proud of you.

There is a fucking circus out there.

A palm fighting a broom,

a broom fighting a lotus,

a lotus now opposed by a cockroach.

It is pretty.

It is enticing.

It is designed for you to pick a side.

Maybe the cockroach against the lotus.

But where are you in its manifesto?

Maybe the broom against the lotus.

But it never gave a fuck about you.

Maybe the palm against the lotus.

But it had decades,

and changed nothing fundamental.

And no,

I know you are not stupid enough

to pick the lotus against all of them.

But the damage is done.

The lotus has created a new normal.

All the ground we fought for,

tooth and nail,

for seventy-five years,

has been pushed back.

Now no matter who comes to power,

we will have to begin again.

We will have to raise our voices again.

Reclaim space again.

Demand dignity again.

Remind them again

that we exist.

But remember this:

No matter how far they push us back,

we never start from zero.

We stand on the shoulders of giants.

We are Ambedkar.

We are Phule.

We are Kanshi Ram.

We are every unnamed person

who fought so we could speak.

They will never get rid of us.

They will never erase us.

We are everywhere.

The fight has become harder.

So have we.

No matter who you are,

lotus, palm, broom, cockroach,

or whatever symbol comes next,

we are arriving.

Your take?

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DYZuCLbThen/

according to this chaddi caste census is casteism

I just visited the National Museum in New Delhi, and honestly, I am absolutely furious.

We are taught to blindly trust museum placards as absolute, objective historical truth. But if you actually stop reading the labels and use your own eyes to look at the sculptures, a deeply unsettling pattern of institutional erasure emerges.

They are systematically mislabeling ancient Buddhist artifacts and re-branding them as Hindu deities to fit a dominant Brahmanical narrative.

Here is the undeniable proof of how our history is being stolen and retrofitted:

The Blatant Double Standard ("The Burden of Pali Proof")

There is a staggering discrepancy in how artifacts are classified. If an ancient sculpture is found, the institution’s default setting is to slap a Hindu label on it—Shiva, Parvati, Lakshmi. The only time they accurately label a statue as Buddhist is if there is an explicit, undeniable Pali inscription carved into the stone. But what happens if the text wore away over 2,000 years? Suddenly, despite having elongated earlobes, meditative mudras, and the unmistakable posture of a Bodhisattva, it’s "Shiva." This isn't an innocent mistake; it’s historical whitewashing.

Exhibit A: The "Shiva" Statues Missing Mandatory Hindu Iconography

Hindu scriptures are highly specific. Scripturally, Shiva must have a crescent moon, the Ganga flowing from his top-knot, and a snake coiled around his neck. Yet, the museum has a "Bust of Shiva" that features zero of these elements. Instead, it has a serene expression, a curly hairstyle, and massive, elongated earlobes—the universal markers of Buddhist art. Look at the complex multi-faced deities labeled as Shiva: the reliance on Dhyana (meditation) and Abhaya (fearlessness) mudras is completely Buddhist. They are banking on the public's ignorance of hand mudras to pull off this heist.

This is Hindu Shiva

This Museum Shiva

Exhibit B: Stealing the Postures of Ascetic Teachers

Look at the figures labeled as Lakulisha and Dakshinamurti (Shiva as the supreme teacher). They are sitting in perfect lotus postures, radiating quiet meditation, with matted hair piled up in a way that perfectly mimics the ushnisha (the Buddha's top-knot). The historical custodians created a convenient loophole: they took the image of the meditating Buddha, stripped its context, and claimed it was just an "ascetic form" of a Hindu god.

This is also Shiva as per Museum

Another Shiva, totally different from the prev one as per museum

Exhibit C: The Subversion of the Divine Feminine

The museum displays statues of "Lakshmi" and "Saraswati" radiating supreme spiritual autonomy, power, and independence. But look closely at the "Saraswati" statue—there is literally a Buddha sitting directly at the top of the sculpture. If you look at the historical and scriptural realities of ancient Brahmanical texts, women were not granted this kind of independent spiritual authority; they were locked into rigid patriarchal structures. However, in Buddhism, female figures like Tara hold immense, independent enlightenment. The museum retrofits these progressive Buddhist figures into a framework that historically didn't even afford women that kind of standing. They even invented a deity called "Brahmani" (a 3-headed female Brahma found nowhere in scriptures) just to avoid admitting the statue is Buddhist art.

Hindu Saraswati

Saraswati as per Museum, see the dress, Hindus for so progressive, and the top the statue, Buddha is sitting

This is Lakshmi as per Museum

Exhibit D: Targeted Defacement

There is a chilling pattern in these galleries: the faces of the figures that are most undeniably Buddhist are almost always the ones that are smashed, broken off, or defaced. While natural wear happens, the specific targeting of the Buddha’s face—while leaving the rest of the stele intact—points to a historical, targeted attempt to physically erase Buddhist influence from the region. Even on stones where you can clearly see smaller Buddhas carved into the top left and right corners, the main placard claims it for Hinduism.

Buddha head at the top is clearly broken and visible. Again, the curly hairstyle and big earlobes are markers of Buddhist Art.

This is also Shiva as per museum

Buddha's remains that were excavated

https://preview.redd.it/6wa7oq7x522h1.png?width=739&format=png&auto=webp&s=044a1b65e6a76c300b1f34fb53536b985d564ca1

https://preview.redd.it/fypnwnzy522h1.png?width=739&format=png&auto=webp&s=46a7c3f18b5c19746d5071d60f214d15156b1d21

This Gold with diamond at the tip was donated by Thailand to Indian Govt. to place Buddha's remains respectfully. There is a tooth as well preserved in this carrier.

We Need to Wake Up.

This isn't just an academic debate; it’s about who controls the narrative of Indian history. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar understood this deeply when he spearheaded the resurrection of Buddhism in India to fight caste hegemony. By blindly accepting these fake museum labels, we are participating in the erasure of a caste-free, progressive past.

It is time to look at the stone, ignore the placards, and recognize the Buddha hiding in plain sight.

I’ve compiled the full breakdown, structural comparisons, and the photo evidence of these mislabeled statues in my deep-dive post here:

Read the complete article.

Now, I have few things to say on my last Pre-Buddha Vedic Myth post. Most of the comments were doing strawman fallacy and ad hominem fallacy. But there was one guy who did actually a little bit of research and provided links as well. I appreciate that.

I am giving a short answer here, but I would be making a specific post.

First of all, I presented evidence - the written inscriptions, Travellers note based on which that stupa was found, scientific analysis of charcoal found in that stupa where C14 was found to be from 800BC, 200-300 years before buddha. But this is not enough apparently.

The same analysis with respect to Vedic period is not required apparently, no need to show any evidence, by default we just assume it must be vedic. This is another fallacy.

Rig veda uses words like Buddha and Stupa in some of their their mantras, I will be creating a seperate post showing this. Also, Ved in Pali means expecience, Anubhav, in sanskrit, Veda means knowledge. Another example of this - King Asok (This is correct name in pali) wrote Devanpiyam in Nilgiri inscription, sanskrit meaning of Devanpiyam is "bakra, moodh (meaning bewakoof)" in sanskrit dictionary. Which king would write himself as such words. In Pali, it means, beloved of Bikkhus. James Prinsepp first decoded this, no vedic brahmin was able to read this script eeven though they were present Pre Buddha apparently, maybe they didn't know anything about buddhism apart from the abuses they do in their hindu scriptures.

Vedic Brahman is different from buddhist brahman and jan brahman, it is written in Brahman Baggo in Dhammapada clearly.

So, showing veda in tripitika doesn't prove shit. Independent evidence are required outside of Buddhist scriptures to prove a mythical vedic period.

Ri, ksh and gya.....these are composite letters, they can only be made after the individual letter like k, sh for Ksh (Kshatiya wala Ksh) are there. Same for rigveda wala ri, Yagya was gya. They have been found only after 5 th century.

Please stay tuned to get more evidence based posts not just "he said, she said", the appeal to authority fallacy.

Child malnutrition remains one of the most pressing challenges in India. Nearly one-third of children under the age of five are stunted: a condition reflecting chronic undernutrition that has lasting consequences for physical growth, cognitive development, and later-life outcomes.

But these outcomes are not evenly distributed. A closer look reveals stark inequalities across social groups. In earlier work , we show that children from historically marginalized caste groups are significantly more likely to be stunted than their more advantaged counterparts. These gaps are large, persistent, and visible across the country.

What explains these gaps? A substantial body of research has pointed to factors such as poverty, sanitation, birth order, and gender bias. These are undoubtedly important. Yet, taken together, they do not fully account for the scale of the disparities we observe across caste groups.

A simple comparison across a historical boundary

To examine this, we make use of a historical and social divide within India: the Vindhyas mountain range. The Vindhyas have long marked a boundary between the regions where the areas to the North of the Vindhyas range comprise the North Central and Central plains, also known as the Indo-Gangetic plain, once home to the Indus Valley Civilization around 3000 BCE, and later known as “Aryavarta” during the Vedic period (c. 1500–600 BCE). This is what was historically the historical geographical span of Hinduism, bounded to the south by the Vindhyas mountain range (Thapar, 1990; Sharma, 2016).

Drawing on this history, we suggest that the caste system and practices such as untouchability more strongly define the social code of the caste system to the North of the Vindhyas range compared to the South of the Vindhyas range. This variation provides a useful lens. If discrimination plays a role in shaping child health, we might expect outcomes for marginalized groups to differ across this boundary in ways that are not observed for more advantaged groups.

https://preview.redd.it/x6pdqncc712h1.png?width=825&format=png&auto=webp&s=d7880a3b51d77a50c261346a7365afcb31e7e77e

Notes: The prevalence and experience of untouchability at the district level is calculated from the second round of the Indian Human Development Survey (IHDS) conducted in 2011-12 and is based on self-reports by households on practice and experience. The data is restricted to districts lying within 100kms of either side of the Vindhyas range and restricts it to districts that do not cross the Vindhyas line. The y-axis range is 0.20 to 0.45 in both panels A and Panel B. Source: CEDA, Ashoka University.

Figure 1 above shows a striking pattern. Focusing on districts within a narrow band – 100 kilometers on either side of the Vindhyas – we find clear differences in the prevalence and experience of untouchability. Households to the north report substantially higher experience of these untouchability than those to the south.

What we see in the data

We begin with a simple comparison. Figure 2 below plots stunting rates and height-for-age scores for children living within 100km to the north and south of the Vindhyas. The contrast is revealing.

For children from Hindu upper-caste groups, there is little to no difference in stunting rates or height outcomes across the boundary. In other words, living north or south of the Vindhyas does not appear to matter for this group.

For children from the Scheduled Castes (SCs), however, the picture is very different. Those living to the south of the Vindhyas have substantially better outcomes – lower stunting rates and higher height-for-age scores – than those living to the north.

When we formalise this comparison using a statistical (difference-in-differences) framework, the differences remain large. SC children living south of the Vindhyas are, on average, about 0.24 standard deviations taller and roughly 7 to 8 percentage points less likely to be stunted than their counterparts to the north. Given a baseline stunting rate of around 29 percent, this represents a sizeable improvement.

https://preview.redd.it/zznpft2g712h1.png?width=825&format=png&auto=webp&s=d73394acf2b2d2d5a632bad1128084b03f24a505

Notes: The figure plots the raw averages for the height-for-age Z-scores and stunting rates for children living within 100km to the north and south of the Vindhyas range. The standard errors are calculated accounting for correlation at the primary sampling unit level. The y-axis range is -2.0 to 1.0 in panels A and 0.20 to 0.60 in Panel B. Source: CEDA, Ashoka University.

Could it be something else?

Of course, differences across regions could reflect many factors. We therefore conduct a series of checks to rule out alternative explanations. First, we show that the results are robust to different ways of defining the comparison area – expanding the geographic window or excluding areas very close to the boundary. The patterns remain stable.

Next, we examine whether the results could be driven by economic or socioeconomic differences. Household wealth, as expected, is strongly associated with child health outcomes overall – children from wealthier households are less likely to be stunted. However, what matters for our analysis is not the level of outcomes, but how they differ across the north and south of the Vindhyas.

Here, we find no evidence that wealth explains the pattern we observe. In particular, poorer households do not experience any additional improvement from living south of the Vindhyas. In other words, while wealth matters in general, it does not account for the north–south differences in outcomes.

We then turn to other disadvantaged groups. If the observed pattern simply reflected broader socioeconomic disadvantage, we should expect to see similar improvements for all such groups. However, this is not what we find. For groups that are economically disadvantaged but not historically subject to caste-based discrimination – such as Scheduled Tribes (STs) or higher ranked Muslims – we do not observe comparable differences across the boundary. By contrast, the pattern is present for groups with a history of caste-based exclusion, such as the lowest rung of Muslims, who are described as Dalit Muslims. This suggests that the observed differences are not driven by disadvantage alone, but are more closely linked to the legacy of caste-based discrimination.

We also conduct placebo exercises, shifting the boundary arbitrarily northward or southward. These comparisons yield no meaningful differences, suggesting that the patterns we observe are specific to the historical divide marked by the Vindhyas.

Taken together, these results make it less likely that the observed differences are driven by general regional or economic factors.

What about underlying mechanisms?

We also explore a wide range of factors that are known to influence child health – maternal education and health, household conditions, sanitation, access to water, and broader community characteristics.

These variables matter. Accounting for them reduces the overall gap in outcomes between caste groups, highlighting the importance of material conditions and public health infrastructure.

However, a key finding remains: these factors do little to explain the difference we observe across the Vindhyas for SC children. The improvement in outcomes for those living to the south persists even after accounting for these variables.

original article:https://thewire.in/health/caste-discrimination-may-be-driving-indias-stunting-gap

as a child i’ve been hearing it at home but now again today when my parent said it, i thought about it a little.

my parent said “tumse kuch pyaar se bolo to tumhe samajh nahi aata. tum neech ho na, isiliye. tumhe sirf bezatti se baat karo tab hi samajh aata hai.”

similarly ive been called “neech” by my parent many many times, in other scenarios or sentences.

i am confused. we are SC. i know i make mistakes and sometimes can’t do chores immediately. i accept my faults.

however this statement really sounds wrong to me.