It seems in this globalized world many intellectual movements deploy the same abstractions. For example, the terms “Brahmin privilege” and “Brahmin supremacy” are clearly constructed as perfect analogs to “white privilege” and “white supremacy.” Brahmins cannot have their own independent history, but operationalize a general model of power relations predicated on the white-black dynamic in the United States that developed in the 19th-century (nevermind that Brahmins were in existence long before this).
This piece, Anti-Blackness Goes Back To Ancient Times, has this passage which I know to be promoting ideas which are false:
Other scholars, such as Harvardâs Suraj Yengde, whose research focuses on the solidarity between Dalits and blacks, say that it wasnât just outsiders â India gave birth to the original color-based social class system that dates back to the ancient Rig Veda texts, to around 1200 B.C. âThe Varna system literally means âcolorâ system, so itâs not surprising that Indians in America have maintained these racist dogmas,â he said. Dalits and the black American experience have strong ties because they are the most disenfranchised people in their communities. âThis whole situation is having a global ripple effect. I donât know if it will bring about much change, but people are definitely talking about it.â
Yengde adds that the caste system and skin color are very much linked. âOftentimes, weâll see Brahmins push ideas of colorism, racism, casteism on British and Muslim invaders,â he said. Thatâs why Yengde doesnât see the inherent bias of some South Asians going away anytime soon.
Within the piece itself, the author notes that there are early Hadith that express racism against dark-skinned people, presumed to be descended from African slaves. Racial attitudes were an issue in the early Islamic period, with a Turkic scholar making the case for the value of his own people, and Arab commentaries on Indians refers somewhat negatively upon their “black” complexion. This persists down to the period of Turkic rule when prestigious “white” Muslims (often born in Central Asia) were distinguished from local “black” Muslims (often descended from converts). Modern colloquial color categories in the Gangetic plain date to this period.
As far as the British, their ideas of race, color, and caste, were shaped by the Atlantic trade and slavery, as well as contacts with Native Americans, long before the rise of the Raj. There was a history of the British Empire long before intense engagement with Indian Brahmins.
I do knot know Yengde’s work, but he seems of a type of modern scholar, taking a meta-narrative, and fitting all of history into that meta-narrative, no matter how absurd. Ultimately this is not a scholarship, but a form of polemic and propaganda.
I stand against this. I will always will.
Addendum: I should note, though there are poor Brahmins, all across India Brahmins tend to be placed nearer the top of the social scale. In a literal sense “Brahmin privilege” is real. But this phenomenon should be explored in the context of Indian history, not a meta-narrative derived from the American context.
Recently I read a piece on Indian cuisine from a “woke” perspective, 
