• loutr@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      The “wealthy elite” in this case are Indian. Goes on to show that it’s not a matter of race/origin but of class, the sooner we collectively realize this the better off we’ll be.

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        It’s both. Trying to erase actual issues people care about (race / gender / culture / sexual orientation) doesn’t work. You can’t just say “don’t worry about it”. Not all struggle is class struggle. People actually care about their culture.

        • loutr@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 days ago

          Not trying to erase anything, I just think it’s the main issue we’re facing right now, and that we’d be better off on many of these other issues if we did something about that one.

          • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 days ago

            That’s what someone who doesn’t care about race, gender, etc. would say. You may not care because none of those affect you negatively.

  • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    Many rich Indians in the west still treat people of lower castes like this. Even the “liberal” ones. Like in Silicon Valley there are Indians from higher castes who try to uphold the caste system and they look down on their Indian colleagues who were born in a lower caste. Even when the person of lower caste has a higher position in the company.

    And Switzerland can you also go after the rich Arabs who have Filipino slaves in their mansions in Europe.

      • palordrolap@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        “Briton” is generally used as the noun form of “British”, so when “Brit” is used as a noun - which is most of the time - it’s abbreviating “Briton”.

        As for who gets to be called “Briton”: In the loosest sense, anyone with residence in Britain can be counted as British when they’re here, whether or not they’re considered ethnically British (by themselves or others).

        Bear in mind that “Briton” originally mean “an inhabitant of the British Isles before any of the Romans, or various flavours of Germanics turned up”. There’s been quite a bit of admixture since then. It makes sense - to the chagrin of the Welsh, no doubt - that the term has mutated a bit over the centuries.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          Residence does not suffice: you’re a Briton if you have British nationality (no matter of which of the 4 nations) so people have to apply for British nationality after at least a certain time as resident (5 years for Indians and a few other nationals, 10 for most foreigners) plus there are other mechanisms to get British nationality (for example, for descendants - resident or otherwise - of people born in Northern Ireland).

          I lived for over a decade in Britain as an EU citizen but I’m not and never was a Briton since I never applied for British nationality.

          • palordrolap@kbin.run
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 days ago

            Maybe not in any legal sense, no. How people and even news media use it, there’s plenty of wiggle room.

            e.g. allowing the ambiguity of “British home owner” to go unclarified, that is as “home owner who is British” as opposed to “owner of a home in Britain”, and any similarly loose interpretations that go along with or derive from that.

            • Aceticon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              I don’t remember ever hearing “Brit” or “Brits” being used for immigrants in Britain and definitelly heard it used for when Britons are living abroad as immigrants (in fact when living in The Netherlands I had some colleagues who were in their own words “Brits”)…

              Always thought it was just another way of saying British and not going into the specifics of which nation in Britain did people come from (the whole “nations” thing for people abroad is generally irrelevant or even misunderstood).

        • HamsterRage@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 days ago

          I always thought of “Briton” in that last sense, while “Brit” has the meaning of anyone living in the UK (almost). But that’s from an outsider’s perspective.

          As my English cousin corrected me, though, “I’m English, ‘British’ could be anything!”. She wasn’t, of course, talking about the difference between English and Welsh, or Scots.

          • palordrolap@kbin.run
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 days ago

            Pity the person of Scottish (or Welsh) ancestry born in England who has to choose what they are on some forms, especially legal ones.

            But then, there are worse problems to have.

  • bizarrocullen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    You remember when a international crisis happened after the Swiss police apprehended Gaddafi’s son when he beat hotel staff?

  • treefrog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    They’re giving the royal family jail time?

    That’s a joke by the way. I read the tagline, but the headline is inaccurate.

    I mean other people are rich but very few families are ‘we own most of the land in Canada’ rich.

    • dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      The royal family are not the richest. Sure they have assets but most of it they can’t really sell.

      They’re scroungers and I hope one day we oust them. How can we bang on about equality whilst holding parasites on a pedestal.

  • dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    I’m shocked, but happy, that they actually got jail time.

    4.5 years for the parents and 4 years for the son and his wife respectively. I think jail time for people like this is the only way we can make sure they don’t do it again, a fine is no use when you’re richer than god.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      Will they serve it though? They weren’t even present at the sentencing due to “poor health”.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        Will they serve it though?

        There is a thing called “international arrest warrant”. Of course they are rich enough to hide somewhere where the Swiss have no contract with, but I don’t think they would enjoy that…