Discrimination, read the following articles and you decide.

[Moxie]

Discrimination, why are whites excluded when discrimation is discussed? Can whites not face reverse discrimination?

Here's two articles read them, and let me know what you think. Has anger and resentment, envy gone to far. Are whites the newest victims of Socialism and it's desire to wipe out all culture that is White and Christian based?

Article one: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/15991/...-English-people

Snippet: In the name of cultural diversity, Labour attacks anything that smacks of Englishness. The mainstream public are treated with contempt, their rights ignored, their history trashed. In their own land, the English are being turned into second-class citizens.

This trend was highlighted this week by the case of Abigail Howarth, a bright teenager who applied for a training position with the Environment Agency in East Anglia but was turned down because she was too white and English. The post, which carries a £13,000 grant, was open only to ethnic minorities, including the Scots, Welsh and Irish.

Such social engineering was justified by the Agency on the grounds that minorities were under-represented in its workforce, the parrot cry used by bureaucrats throughout the public sector to justify bias against the English. 

Almost every interaction with any public service now leads to a detailed analysis of one’s ethnic status

Though Abigail’s case rightly caused outrage, it was not unique. This kind of reverse discrimination is now rife across the state machine, underwritten by the very English tax­payers who are the targets of institutional prejudice.

Although it is technically illegal to restrict jobs to certain ethnic groups, the racially fixated commissars have found a way round that problem by developing

Article two: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770

Snippet: Black pupils are enjoying Government-funded school trips that exclude white students.

One hundred schools have signed up to the controversial Black Pupils Achievement Programme, which the Government is piloting in an effort to reduce persistent under-achieving among black children. Participating schools are encouraged to develop ideas to improve learning and behaviour among black pupils and to involve their parents more.

Scroll down for more ...

[margrace]

Well remember when there were signs in New York windows saying help wanted no Irish need apply. I am sure we can find some in Canada, for instance, Black porters on our trains who were univercity educated but couldn't get a job. None of us has the right to throw stones we all are culpable.

I find discussions such as this upsetting to say the least.

[Leafless]

Can whites not face reverse discrimination?

Whites can face reverse discrimination but must prove their case in court.

The basic problem is government allowing and supporting non-White racial intervention that racially interferes with the majority White population.

Why the press remains silent on this issue and why no political party has evolved to support the White, English speaking population of this country is a complete mystery to me.

Canada is basically a White country and to renege on that fact to accommodate and support different cultures and races is looking for an invitation to major problems.

[Bonam]

Such social engineering was justified by the Agency on the grounds that minorities were under-represented in its workforce, the parrot cry used by bureaucrats throughout the public sector to justify bias against the English. 

Almost every interaction with any public service now leads to a detailed analysis of one’s ethnic status

That right there is the problem if you ask me. Why the ethnic analysis? Positions should be based on merit, not which ethnicity needs to be more represented. All affirmative action policies like these achieve is a renewed sense of resentment among majority white/English people towards the minorities, since they feel that they are being unfairly disadvantaged in this way. The best way to make everyone equal, is to treat everyone equally, not to try to reverse the injustices of the past.

[Guest American Woman]

That right there is the problem if you ask me. Why the ethnic analysis? Positions should be based on merit, not which ethnicity needs to be more represented. All affirmative action policies like these achieve is a renewed sense of resentment among majority white/English people towards the minorities, since they feel that they are being unfairly disadvantaged in this way. The best way to make everyone equal, is to treat everyone equally, not to try to reverse the injustices of the past.

The goal of Affirmative Action is to treat everyone equally; ie: give everyone the same opportunities in spite of their backgrounds. It's not trying to "reverse injustices of the past," but to deal with present injustices, thus trying to give everyone at least more of an equal opportunity. It's impossible to give everyone "equal opportunity."

You say that all it does is achieve a renewed sense of resentment among majority white/English people towards the minorities, since they feel that they are being unfairly disadvantaged in this way. I'd like to point out that in order for it to be "renewed," it had to have been there in the first place, so minorities have been subjected to resentment, making policies such as Affirmative Action necessary. It's no more horrible for "white/English people" to feel they are being treated unfairly than it is for non-white/English people to be treated unfairly. Part of making the world more fair and equal is having to lose some of our 'privilidged' status, so we need to deal with it without feeling resentment towards the minorities; or more realistically, in spite of feelings of resentment.

[Renegade]

The goal of Affirmative Action is to treat everyone equally; ie: give everyone the same opportunities in spite of their backgrounds.

Despite what the goal of Affirmative Action, the PRACTICE of Affirmative Action is to treat everyone UNEQUALLY because of their backgrounds.

[Guest American Woman]

Despite what the goal of Affirmative Action, the PRACTICE of Affirmative Action is to treat everyone UNEQUALLY because of their backgrounds.

No. The practice is not to treat everyone unequally. The practice, as I said, deals with present injustices, trying to equal things out accordingly. They are trying to counterbalance injustices and inequalities. Trying to give everyone an equal chance/opportunity is not treating everyone unequally. To do otherwise, to not try to even things out, would result in people being treated unequally. Forever, really. Sometimes the majority has to be forced to give minorities/people with less priviledged backgrounds equal opportunity; otherwise nothing will ever change for the minorities.

Edited December 24, 2007 by American Woman

[Renegade]

No. The practice is not to treat everyone unequally. The practice, as I said, deals with present injustices, trying to equal things out accordingly. They are trying to counterbalance injustices and inequalities. Trying to give everyone an equal chance/opportunity is not treating everyone unequally. To do otherwise, to not try to even things out, would result in people being treated unequally. Forever, really. Sometimes the majority has to be forced to give minorities/people with less priviledged backgrounds equal opportunity; otherwise nothing will ever change for the minorities.

Actually if I understand how AA works, it does nothing to look at their "backgrounds", it simply looks at their race, gender, or other categorization. It doesn't matter if someone has been raised in a priviledged background so long as he/she is in the right category. So a rich black young woman is entitled to a AA position where a poor white young man is not. Isn't that the way it works?

[buffycat]

AA is a double edged sword. While it has allowed many, who would not have had the opportunity, to perhaps advance in thier careers, it has also cheapened recruiting processes and in some cases led to those not qualified (outside of skin colour) to hold ranks they are ill equipped and simply not qualified for. This is where the 'resentment' comes in, I think.

A solution might be to conduct all interviews of a potential employee 'blind', perhaps by a number with no face to face interaction. This way the candidate is judged purely on their merit. Of course - this would be unworkable, I know that - but it's about the only way one can ensure 'total' equality when hiring.

I think it comes down to the inability of government to legislate human behaviour (God knows they try). It won't work and it's consequences can often be more disasterous then if the problem had been left to solve itself through ordinary means (changing attitudes, market forces, etc).

*

Moxie - I share your frustration, but don't want to punish all members of a percieved minority for what the nanny state is doing. In effect, the nanny state is creating further divisions between peoples of various backgrounds, thus ensuring we never all get together and realize it's 'them' who are the big problem and threaten our (the peoples) prosperity. Divide and conquer - old as time.

[iForgot]

Completely agreed buffy. Moxie isn't alone though, I've met plenty of people who take their anger out on the minorities instead of the state.

[buffycat]

Welcome to the forum iForgot!

I think far too many neglect to blame the state. We have allowed this festering monster to flourish, we have fed it dutifully, now it robs us of our common sense and our community spirits, and we have allowed our own responsibility to our fellow man to be taken over by our nanny - to our own detriment. We have created a governess which will eventually govern over US, and that is not what liberty and free will is all about. We have become the sheep, followers, grazers and irresponsible.