One way racism?

Ok just something that has been bugging me for a while, does anyone else get annoyoed by the way racism seems to be a very one way system.

In Britain certain employers, such as the police, have the have a certain percentage of empolyes of ethnic minoritys.

That can mean, that if two people apply for a job, one white one black, and the minoity quoter is not filled the black person will get the job. The only difference between these two people is their skin colour, and that is what is used to pick who gets the job. Surely not the very definition of racism?

Your views?

Answer #1

Jimahl, point 1. A person with black skin (inherent difference among the various human races) is given the job (indivisually achieves employment) based on the colour of his skin.

You are wrong. Try actually reading the definitions (they aren’t points). Proponents of these policies are not saying that that the inherrent differences in races do indeed determine cultural or individual achievement. They are saying the opposite, there is nothing inherrent in a particular race that should prevent them from achieving. The only thing that is deterring them from achievement is past cultrual and racial bias. Again, the reason for doing this is to overcome racism, not to propagate it.

point 2. There are laws in this country (a policy made by the system of government) where by point 1 is an example (fostering such a doctrine (point 1)).

Again, your interpretation of definition 1 is wrong, therefor so is this one. The government is not fostering a policy that ‘inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement’. They are fostering the idea that that is not true, and that past oppression has had long term affects on the minority and that government can help overcome those affects with these policies. Now you can argue the merits of such policies as being ineffective, but you are dead wrong when you call it a racist policy.

point 3. really just a repeat of point one, but a bit more extreme.

You can’t ignore the extreme part of the definition, because that is the crux of racism. Hatred. And these policies are not about hatred, it is about correcting the wrongs done to minorities.

This is sort of the point I’m trying to make, a lot of people don’t see it as descrimative because you’re doing something nice to the minority, however you are still given them DIFFERENT treatment based on the fact that they are a minority, you are still descriminating.

Lots of people are treated differently for different reasons. Why do seniors get discounts at movies and such? Is it because the movie theater hates young people? Learn the definition of racism. Treating someone different is not the same as being racist. You can look at it as a form of discrimination, but it is not meant to cause permanent harm to, or control over, the majority. It is meant to help the minority in a system rigged to mainly help the majority.

As for the woman and man, once again I would look for more that qualifications. Also you referenced a equal situation again, the same ‘hire the minority’ rule still applies if the white person is the better suited for the job, the quoter must be filled.

So do you think that past racist and segregation policies don’t have any affect on minorities and society today? Do you think that all hiring and educational advancement opportunities are absolutely fair and objective? I am not a big fan of QUOTA (that is how it is spelled) systems per se, but I do believe in affirmative action, especially in educational opportunities.

One should be careful when tossing around accusations of racism. By doing so, you are making racism sound much less destructive than it really is. The US has still not completely moved past it, despite Obama being elected. I have personally seen racism in action when evaluating candidates for employment. You can’t tell me racism is not still around, when you hear a manager say, ‘yeah, he is a good candidate, too bad he is black.’ Becasue that is exactly what I heard when I gave my opinion of who I thought was best for a job. As long as attitudes like that exist, affirmative action will be necessary.

Answer #2

Ok I’ve got to love your first counter argument You are wrong and I’ll come back with one just as mature, I’m not read though what I have written, it clearly shows how picked the black person based on their skin colour fits the definition.

lots of people… Yup there are lots of differnces between everyone, and that is why the employer should have the right to pick whom they want based on ones a lot more important than skin colour, such as family status. Treating people differently is not going to help intergration.

I broke a leg onces on a camp, everyone was very kind and helped me a lot, always made sure I got the best seat, stuff like that. Yer without a doubt it made my life a lot easier, but it didn’t make me feel like part of the group, it made me feel like I was some drain some durden.

I have personally seen… As have I that is what brought about this question. I work for a govoment research group and we needed a new assistant. The very words of my magager, *Ok , we’ve got the new assistants in today, and need you to do the interviews. It’s a really good group, all top notch, thing is… we really need to keep our full funding… so I’ve got to ask you to pick … you know how it works.*

I’m not trying to say we should give all the jobs to the white people, I’m saying the jobs should go to the people who are best suited.

Oh ps. a wise man once said, when you start picking out things like poor spelling in a debate it shows you know you’re losing.

Answer #3

Here are a few dissenting opinions from an older post… Jimahl and I sparred a few rounds… if anything is ascertained… Jimahl’s unmitigated passion regarding this topic is quite evident in the past and steadfast.

I felt as if I had unwittingly grabbed a tiger by the tail… lol

These posts were created before quotation marks were removed from posts… it may be tricky to follow when another’s remarks are being quoted in a statement… sorry

http://www.funadvice.com/q/can_only_whites_be_racist/2

Answer #4

I am sure it is rare that it is ever THE number one priority. It is probably just a factor in the decision.

What about all the times the number one reason for NOT hiring someone is because of the color of the applicant’s skin? That happens a hell of a lot more.

Answer #5

Jimahl, point 1. A person with black skin (inherent difference among the various human races) is given the job (indivisually achieves employment) based on the colour of his skin.

point 2. There are laws in this country (a policy made by the system of government) where by point 1 is an example (fostering such a doctrine (point 1)).

point 3. really just a repeat of point one, but a bit more extreme.

Ifeelcrazy: This is sort of the point I’m trying to make, a lot of people don’t see it as descrimative because you’re doing something nice to the minority, however you are still given them DIFFERENT treatment based on the fact that they are a minority, you are still descriminating.

As for the woman and man, once again I would look for more that qualifications. Also you referenced a equal situation again, the same ‘hire the minority’ rule still applies if the white person is the better suited for the job, the quoter must be filled.

Answer #6

I think there is a slight miscommunication…it is not racism per se…however there IS racial discrimation. When the number one priority is given to the skin color of the applicant…

p

Answer #7

I guess Phrannie got it really, I mean I wasn’t trying to say that this system is a form of an attack against white people, only that it’s decrimantion.

And yer, I don’t think anyone is going to say that it doesn’t heppen the other way around, but that’s not to say black people won’t hire white people because they’re white.

I still just don’t think this system is helping, I feel that indivisual merit should be what matters. With the world as it is at the moment everyone needs help finding work.

Answer #8

maxyfox, no matter how you spin it, you are wrong. Here is the dictionary.com definition of racism.

racism /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ –noun

  1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
  2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
  3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Gee, I don’t see giving minorities additional help in economic and educational advancement listed as one of the definitions. Racism is about hatred. Policies like this are not based on a hatred of whites. It is done because minorities DO NOT have the same opportunities whites have. If you don’t believe that, you are very naive.

Answer #9

Von, if this practice makes whites act more racist, it is probably because they were already racist to begin with. Nothing will change some people, but that doesn’t mean you ignore the problems of institutionalized racism.

Answer #10

I agree with jimahl. Choosing someone over someone else because they are in a minority group is not racist.

What about if a woman and a man was in equally qualified and you decide to employ the woman because you want to empower women overall because they were also previously disadvantaged (example in my country)?

That wouldn’t be discrimination in the same way as the situation above was described, it’s about helping minority/previously disadvantaged groups, not being racist.

This type of promotion does not cause racism, you are either racist to start with or you are not.

Answer #11

In responce to Ifeelcrazy, like vonbrett said, I would choose based on their personailty. But a further note, is it is not just a case of going for the black person if the two people are equal. In a fair number of cases the white person is clearly the better person for the job, higher quilification and more experance. But as the quoter has to be met (inforced by funding cuts and other such punishments) the black person is given the job.

And to Jimahl no matter how you spin it, using the colour of someones skin to make a decision is the definition of racist.

Answer #12

Jimahl got to it before me.

The reason they get preference is BECAUSE the are the minority and minorities are usually discriminated against. This prevents that from happening.

Think about what you asked again, let’s say both had the same qualification and attributes..who would you then choose?

Answer #13

It is very different. Whites are not subjected to the same kind of discriminition as minorities on a daily basis. Affirmative action is used to even the playing field. Minorities do not have the power to discriminate against the majority, and no matter how one tries to spin it, these type of hiring practices are not being done for racist reasons, it is being done to overcome racism.

Answer #14

Its hard to see it today, but look at what’s been accomplished in the past 100 years, or even 50…

Answer #15

it clearly shows how picked the black person based on their skin colour fits the definition.

No it doesn’t. In order to fit the definition you would have to show that the reason the black person was selected was becasue the person making the selection did so because they felt white people were inferior due to inherrent difference in the race. If you can’t show that, than it doesn’t fit.

Yup there are lots of differnces between everyone, and that is why the employer should have the right to pick whom they want based on ones a lot more important than skin colour, such as family status. Treating people differently is not going to help intergration.

First off, I don’t know where you are from, but there are no regulations over employers to fill racial or ethnic quotas in the US. Most affirmative action progams are for college admissions, or are volluntary for employers, or for civil service positions. So no one is forcing a private employers to hire anyone.

The question wasn’t whether treating people differently helps integration, it was whether afirmative action policies were racist.

I broke a leg onces on a camp, everyone was very kind and helped me a lot, always made sure I got the best seat, stuff like that. Yer without a doubt it made my life a lot easier, but it didn’t make me feel like part of the group, it made me feel like I was some drain some durden.

And what does this have to do with anything we are talking about? It isn’t about feeling part of the group. It is about improving opportuinities for minorities. The majority already has much more opportunity.

I have personally seen… As have I that is what brought about this question. I work for a govoment research group and we needed a new assistant. The very words of my magager, **Ok me, we’ve got the new assistants in today, and need you to do the interviews. It’s a really good group, all top notch, thing is… we really need to keep our full funding… so I’ve got to ask you to pick only black persons name… you know how it works.

And were you not able to find a qualified candidate who was black? Trust me, for every black candidate that gets a job this way, there are 20 whites who get hired over the black candidate.

I’m not trying to say we should give all the jobs to the white people, I’m saying the jobs should go to the people who are best suited.

No one is suggesting unqualified people be forced into positions. And what is to say that your manager isn’t racist and would hire the white guy no matter what, if given the choice?

Oh ps. a wise man once said, when you start picking out things like poor spelling in a debate it shows you know you’re losing.

When one has to claim they are winning in a debate, that proabably means they aren’t. The only thing I pointed out was one word that you mispelled the same way twice. Just trying to help you out a little…

Answer #16

So… after countless years of minorities being at a disadvantage… its somehow unfair for them to get an advantage?

Answer #17

Everyone shud be treated equaly

More Like This
Ask an advisor one-on-one!
Advisor

ROSS & ASMAR Attorneys at law

Immigration Law, Criminal Law, Civil Litigation

Advisor

Professional Lawyer - Dr. Has...

Law Firms, Legal Services, Advocates and Consultants

Advisor

MaxiCert

Consulting Services, Certification Services, Business Services

Advisor

MaxiCert

Consulting Services, Certification Services, Business Services

Advisor

Economic Law Partners

Law Firms, Corporate Law, Contract Law