Kamala Harris’ mother migrated to California from Chennai, in southern India. But the senator “rarely mentions the Indian side of her family while campaigning.” I wonder why?
They’re a relatively new addition to the country’s state-planned multicultural mosaic. Most Indian-Americans have “arrived in America over the past two decades.” But they are highly aggressive politically and leftist.
Thanks to chain migration, the number of highly aggressive leftists will be increasing exponentially (well, almost).
Could Indian-Americans really grow into a significant political force? Their numbers look too puny to matter as a national voting bloc. Devesh Kapur, at Johns Hopkins University, estimates that only 1m voters of Indian descent are politically active. That number could double within two decades through immigration, more naturalisations and as children age. …
… Most are reliably Democrats—77% of Indian-Americans backed Hillary Clinton in 2016, for example—who cluster in partisan strongholds such as California, New York and Illinois. …
… Capitol Hill, for example, is crammed with staff and interns of Indian-American heritage. They also appear to be “over-represented” in academia, the media and other influential posts. He talks of the growing significance of informal networks, as well-connected Indian-Americans find jobs for each other’s offspring. Ms Jayapal also points to the prevalence of skilled Indian-Americans (perhaps subsidised in their first jobs by well-off parents) who work as assistants to senators and representatives in Washington.
What the gentleman interviewed means—and as many in the corporate world know all too well—ONCE an individual of South-Asian descent gets into a position of power, he hires others of the same persuasion.
Anglo-Americans, on the other hand, hire by talent, not by tribe.
In the image attached, Microsoft employees cheer on the India Cricket team.
MORE: “To Washington, via Chennai: The Rising Clout of Indian-Americans.“