Easy: If you're in a country that's ~90% white, why would it be a surprise that 90% of the labor ends up being white? Are you seriously trying to play dumb and question obvious stuff like demographics under the nepotism/racism playing card? Similarly, why would it be surprising that a team in India is ~100% Indians?

But if in a country with a majority white demographic, Indian managers hire their wives, extended family members and Indian connection to work in their teams, therefore excluding a lot of the local, mostly white candidates, from the resume pile out of the get-go, you can't not raise eyebrows and assume potential discriminatory hiring practices, which are illegal in most western nations.

By the way, I haven’t personally seen or heard of any examples of Indians (or other races) hiring wives and family members. This is often alleged and yet I’ve never come across a real life example. I am not saying it doesn’t happen at all, but that if it does, it is probably very rare and no different than how often it can happen with any other group. What I often see is people claiming that Indians hiring Indians (regardless of familial relations) is nepotistic, and I think that’s an assumption without basis.

For white people, just having your whole network be mostly white is itself said to be a red flag to a lot of people, regardless of how it came to be that way. So the same should apply to Indian people too. Their network ought to be more diverse if that’s the only place they are going to hire from.

(Or else we can drop the quotas, and hire on merit only - I’m absolutely fine with that!)

Personally my network has plenty of both. I’ve worked with some incredible Indian, American, and Indian-American people and they’ve each earned my respect.