Prejudice and Descrimination-Past and Present

Remove all ads!

You seem to be forgetting that Hitler and friends were masters of manipulation. If we start on the stereotype of wealth it is really easy to twist that into you got your wealth dishonestly by stealing from ordinary Germans, that since you would do anything for a Mark you must be immoral, that you would cheat to get what you want, and since it is all about you, the rest of Germany must suffer therefore you must be unpatriotic. Sorry, I couldn't come up with something about communist that quickly

It is an interesting question though. If the Jewish stereotype had instead been that they were fantastic lovers would the Nazis have picked a different group to villify?

 

I was not forgetting anything of the sort and in fact you pretty much presented the point I was about to make. While there is a cause for each stereotype it is too often that this stereotypes gets twisted to the extreme or entirely manipulated to false conclusions. In which case a new, factually incorrect stereotype is formed. This is sadly very often the case still today and there are allways extremist groups willing to use these stereotypes to spread hate.

 

Sorry then, I thought you were trying to disprove my theory. The fact that people will twist things for their own benefit (be it evil or good) has always been true, and I doubt that it will ever change.

 

Considering they villified every group that wasn't "germanic" I am sure they would have. Nazism was letting prejudice rule taken to the extreme, anything that fell outside an arbitrary defined framework was fair game.

 

I am inclined to agree with this. Perhaps it would be more fair to say that the police force should be a mirror of the applicants to the police force. If 90% of all applicants are white males, then it would make sense if 90% of the police force were white males. It would only be discriminatory if there were efforts taken to discourage people who were not white males from applying in first place.

 

And there I disagree, partly for the reasons I outlined above and partly because it is a certain kind of people who are predisposed to apply to the police and it is a kind of people you do not want armed and with power over others.

 

Gnarfflinger - I was pointing out hypocracy and foolishness in well meaning paper pushing

I believe in equality in the workplace, in society, in general. But more often than not the enforcement of quoatas for 'minorities' is as likely to cause resentment than welcoming atmospheres in every office regardless or race, sex and creed.

If an employer really doesn't want a group in their business, they will find away to evade the quotas, find alternatives that fill them just as well just to keep a group at bay.

For example I have never seen a company fined for not employing enough white males in the UK. Just as it is ridiculous fining taxpayers money for a service that is voluntary and more often than not an 'on call' employment.

There should be *rewards* for diversity: punishments for obvious, intentional discrimination. If a Human Resources department keeps track of all the employment and CVs recieved for a position and notices that there is an obvious bias in repeated instances where perhaps race or sex is the only difference, THEN there should be some intervention. As it is punishment because the race/sex pie chart doesn't match the company is simply folly. Provides INCENTIVE perhaps, but also encourages a resentful mentality.

Qualification for a job should be more important. I realise the hypocrasy within the fact I will benefit, but doesn't mean I approve of the system. I should be able to get somewhere on my own merit, not on having breasts and an interesting skin tone!

 

The police force isn't supposed to be your best buddy, they are a symbol of authority on the streets. If you can relate to police officers, and they can relate to you, then there's a risk that the atmosphere becomes too informal. I often deal with police officers, but it never gets chummy, even though I'm white and male. I'm a witness, there to report a crime. It is their duty to record my statement, and judge my reliability as a witness. If I got too cozy with the officers, then they'd possibly give me the benefit of the doubt, and would be negligent in their work. The whole idea of making the police force mirror society, is to make minorities feel more confortable around the police. It's my opinion, and I may be wrong about this, that certain ethnicities won't feel comfortable around the police until they have their own 'connections' within the force, and this isn't a good thing.
To be fair, having female and ethnic police officers can be advantageous in certain situations, because they are effective in calming down some people, who would just be hostile towards white male police officers. So it's not always a bad thing.
joacquin, I agree that the kind of ppl that apply to be police aren't particularly nice, but the same can be said of the minorities who apply, so besides some variation in gender and skincolour, it's still the same 'dogs' on the streets.

 

Coin, there's a flip side to that. Having a police officer who knows the community means having one who knows who's prone to lying, who would do what to protect who, and who's willing to talk when the community is threatened. It also means that the community will turn to the police to solve problems rather than trying to solve them themselves or turning to less legal elements. Yes, familiarity can be abused, by both parties, but it can also be a huge advantage.

As for the ethnicity side, there are a lot of ethnic groups that have good reasons not to trust the police, and will continue to do so until someone they know and trust, or at least some one 'like them', is in the force. Again, yes there are risks, but also benefits.

The risks for both of these can be strongly curtailed by appropriate oversite, but good luck making that common.

 

Oh my god, are you agreeing with my NOG?! There is a first thing for everything I guess.

Oh and I already adressed the issue of "differently coloured dogs" Coin. At least if the dogs are of different colours they will harass different people and committ different trespasses and not to mention and maybe the most important if they are a mixed group they might be too careful to step over the line as they are as has been stated, different.

 

Yeah, funny huh? There was a time I had him in my ignore list, because responding to his posts got me into trouble with moderators more than once. BTW, why did you say your NOG? That looks a bit too close for comfort.
I guess since I'm a white male myself, I emphasize the risks attached to going overboard with anti-discrimination laws. It's not about being disadvantaged myself, which I can bear, but about what's good for everyone as a whole.
We should give minorities an advantage to compensate for prejudice and mistreatment which is definitely still present in society, but when it undermines the quality of the police force, and as a result the safety on the streets, then it goes too far. For the police force, this should just be a guideline, not an enforced law. If 2 people with the same capacities and competence apply for a job, then give the minority the job. However, when it's clear that there are a whole bunch of white guys who'd be better policemen, then not hiring them, to accomodate a law which should be of lower priority, is just wrong.

 

Yeah, joacqin, only my wife calls me that. I know we're close and all, but...

 

Geez you two, get a room.

Certain minorities dislike cops, even ones of the same racial group.
Most of the black officers i worked with caught more heck & grief from other blacks than anyone else.
There was always the "uncle Tom" or "Oreo" or "sellout" comment in just about every encounter if they didn't show preferential treatment towards them.
To their honor, almost all the black officers i knew were scrupulously honest(there was that 1 guy but then there always is. I mean really, if you had left your duty belt on the trunk lid when you left your house, would you actually ask a fellow officer going off-duty to borrow his until you could go back & find yours!!)

 

Makes sense to me. There are careers that are female dominated. Nursing and grade school teachers spring to my mind. There are men who enjoy nursing and teaching grade school and IMO they should be encourgaed to do so but I wouldn't want to see a law that said 33% had to be male.