But then your supposed to finish reading it, and have some charity in your interpretation. The gp implicitly recognizes their epistemic bias by affirming they should be open to scrutiny.

This is extremely important. One should take a good faith approach during a discussion. I see the opposite happening far too frequently these days, and it makes having productive conversations neigh impossible.

That's the reason why things should not be taken out of context. It's not like every Indian on the planet is a witness to casteism.

Context then.

> I am Indian-American (born into a brahmin family if that matters) and personally haven't noticed casteism, barring the occasional idiot in our communities.

Translation: I don't see a problem.

> Having said that, we (Indian-Americans) should be open to criticism and scrutiny.

Translation: even though I'm open to criticism, I don't see a problem.

> We are a very successful lot - arguably the richest immigrant group in America - surely we can be secure enough to confront some of these bad things. We need to stop being defensive and touchy about such charges.

Translation: blah, blah, blah . . . me, me, me. Nothing about the problem.

Sometimes, when you read a sentence to the end, the meaning changes.

You should try that sometimes