It is not even that Jati is right and Jativaad is wrong if one takes the traditional sense of Jaativad instead of translating casteism to Jaativaad.

Jaativad is 'pro one's own Jaati' and not 'anti other Jaatis'

Jaativad is seen to be 'against others' because of its derivation from the notion of casteism that came from Europe.
While both caste and Jaati are based on birth there two important differences. +

1. Concept caste came into being in Spain and Portugal in 15th century due to hostility of 'old christians' against 'new christians'. Basically the very basis of caste organisation was hostility. Anyone in your caste was friend and anyone outside it was not. +

the attitude towards those outside caste i.e. people who were suspected to be 'not real christians' or 'crypto Muslims" was to be completely segregated from them.
2. The second difference, as alluded already, was that in case of European caste, there was religious difference. +

i.e. the people inside the group had a different religion ( Xianity) and those outside had a different one ( suspected to have recent Muslim ancestry)

compared to Indian
1. The relationship between one Jati and another. unlike between two castes , is not one based on hostility+

While two jaatis might compete for power and resources, there was also a strong aspect of cooperation and anyone who has been a village must have seen the intricate web of relationships and mutual dependencies between various Jaatis. Also, unlike the 'caste' divisions of Europe+

which had been born not very long back in a period of conflict, Hindu Jaati vyavastha was already thousands of years old stable system. +

2. Secondly the Jaati segregation in India didn't imply religious split. A person inside my jaati and the one outside it worshiped same gods which was another adhesive force.

In summary
inter caste relations 1. Exclusion 2. separation 3. different religions
Inter Jaat : +

1. Economic and social cooperation 2. Intermingling of various kind ( even if maintaining certain types of distance) 3. Same religion

If caste divisions implied a conflict, the Jaati divisions implied a mechanism for complementing and collaborating. However, the Europeans +

taking Jaati to be analogous to caste assumed that similar hostility marked inter jaati relations in India. And over the decades and centuries they transferred their own understanding to our minds and today Jaativad has become synonymous with conflict, violence and oppression.+

Given what the term has come to mean, we will not call ourselves Jaativaadi because we don't seek to harm or belittle other Jaatis. However, we will definitely not shy away from saying that Jaati was and still is a source of good +

As I had expressed some weeks back, it represents the highest level of stable unity achieved by Hindu society. Today when most people probably don;t even bond with first cousins, Jaati gave us a system where at least everyone from your Jaati was your 'own'. +

Today, that sense of 'own' is limited to nuclear family. Doesn't that prove we are worse off in terms of social integration i.e. we have fallen from jaati l to nuclear family level unity.
So, which worldview is more divisive? : Jaati vyavastha or the one against it? +

End