Scholars defended treating caste discrimination as within UN racial-discrimination protections

Evidence

For a response to Béteille and Gupta, see Gerald D. Berreman in Natarajan and Greenough (2009). Berreman says: “What is ‘scientifically nonsensical’ is Professor Béteille’s misunderstanding of ‘race’. What is ‘mischievous’ is his insistence that India’s system of ascribed social inequality should be exempted from the provisions of a UN Convention whose sole purpose is the extension of human rights to include freedom from all forms of discrimination and intolerance—and to which India, along with most other nations, has committed itself” (54–5). — Ambedkar, B R, Annihilation of Caste_ The Annotated…, 457

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies that ‘race’ as used by critics like Béteille was scientifically misread — Berreman reframes the debate term by term.
• XREF: connects to: An Indian official opposed treating caste discrimination as racial discrimination at the UN — Ambedkar, B R, Annihilation of Caste_ The Annotated…, 456; Caste is compared to racism only through descent-based discrimination, not identity of forms — Ambedkar, B R, Annihilation of Caste_ The Annotated…, 41; Anticolonialists defended universal rights against cultural-difference exceptions — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 271
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: An Indian official opposed treating caste discrimination as racial discrimination at the UN — Ambedkar, B R, Annihilation of Caste_ The Annotated…, 456; Caste is compared to racism only through descent-based discrimination, not identity of forms — Ambedkar, B R, Annihilation of Caste_ The Annotated…, 41; Anticolonialists defended universal rights against cultural-difference exceptions — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 271