कैसे अमेरिका ने ख़त्म किया रंगभेद, और भारत जातिभेद ख़त्म करने में क्यों रहा नाकाम...

Warning: The following details are meant for mature audiences. It contains material that may not suitable for fanboys or followers of the Herd. Intellectual discretion is advised.

A tale of two countries
In some ways, they are similar enough to be siblings. They are the two largest democracies on the planet. Both harbor enormous diversity. Both were built by waves of immigration. Both have shameful pasts that they have struggled to acknowledge and make amends for.

In other ways, they are poles apart. Situated on opposite ends of the earth. One among the richest nations on the planet, the other among the poorest. One leads the world in technological and cultural innovation. The other boasts about becoming the back office of the world.

India outlawed discrimination in 1952. The US did so 12 years later. Let's compare the two.

The need:
The US was the richest and most powerful nation on earth. About 10-15% of its population - mostly blacks - could be termed seriously disadvantaged or deprived. Beyond philosophical notions of justice and fair play, the rest of the nation didn't really need to do anything. They were doing pretty well anyway. Yet, they did.

India was among the poorest and most corrupt nations on earth. Over half its population - much more by some measures - was deprived and under-developed. Doing something to uplift the disadvantaged was not a "good to have". It was essential for India's survival and progress.

The environment:
The US had a well functioning legal system. Laws were enforced. Violations were tried and penalized swiftly. They also had an excellent public education system and thriving private enterprise.

India, on the other hand, had a creaky legal system. Enforcement was (and remains) patchy at best. The wheels of justice moved slowly. Trivial cases would take decades to resolve. The public education system was practically non existent. Private enterprise was merely a legacy of feudal inheritance and control.

The strategy:
The US had a history of valuing individual liberty and free enterprise. Yet, once they decided that discrimination should be ended, they went after all sectors. Private employers, public places, educational institutions etc. were all brought under the purview of anti-discrimination laws. There were very few exemptions.

India, despite its professed path of socialism, targeted only government and government aided institutions. While untouchability was outlawed, individuals and private enterprises were under no obligation to stop other forms of discrimination or harassment.

The execution:
Once the Civil Rights Act was passed, the US acted swiftly to implement it in letter and spirit. The act was strengthened periodically with additional pieces of legislation such as the Fair Housing Act. Over the next few decades, they aggressively enforced many things:

• Desegregation in schools
• Desegregation in neighborhoods
• Acknowledgement of race discrimination in school curriculum
• Affirmative action in all educational institutions
• Affirmative action in private enterprises
• Affirmative action in most government agencies
• Effective banning of discrimination in all public places (parks, transportation, theaters, stadiums etc.)
• Effective banning of discrimination in educational institutions, offices, government agencies.

What  do you mean by effective banning? Anyone found discriminating on basis of race, gender etc. was actually penalized. Refusing to serve a black customer at a restaurant often landed you in jail.

India, on the other hand, implemented only three items that even had a semblance of effectiveness

• Reservation for scheduled castes and tribes in government jobs, which accounted for less than 2% of the total workforce
• Reservation for scheduled castes and tribes in government run tertiary educational institutions, which catered to less than 1% of the population that needed to be educated
• Reservation for scheduled castes and tribes in the parliament

It took another six decades to acknowledge the wide prevalence of the caste system and introduce quotas for other backward castes. But legislation against discrimination and harassment remains woefully weak, and enforcement hopelessly inadequate. Other measures to reduce inequality, such as the Right to Education (RTE) act, were implemented half-heartedly and met with fierce resistance from the influential elite.

Outcomes:
The US has been reasonably successful in integrating disadvantaged groups into the mainstream. Plenty remains to be done, but the general consensus is that things are moving in the right direction. The only real debate is about the pace of change. The US continues to remain the vanguard of technological and cultural innovation. Much of it is fuelled by its acceptance and encouragement of diversity.

India remains mostly backward. Nearly 70 years after becoming independent, it ranks 138th in per capita income, 119th in human development, 170th in literacy, 112nd in health, and 124th in economic freedom (all numbers from Wikipedia). It still struggles with serious inequality.

(Source: Quora User)