Equal Rights?

[Shasta]

Riddle me this

(read first if you aren't familiar with how NZ works)
In New Zealand, we have a bit of racial disharmony over land rights issues, (we were here first etc) and of course the usual Black vs White social problems (NOT a racist comment, just pointing out a fact). Now, in the last few years, Millions of dollars have been paid to them (who knows where it is going, because none of my Maori friends have ever seen a cent- but that is another topic entirely), and our country is SO obsesessed with political correctness that every government sign, letter, document, tv add etc is written not only in both languages, but often majority is in Maori. Only a handful of people actually speak the language, yet there we are greeted in maori (whether we are maori or not). It is getting so bad, that one of the major political parties has set up a " office for the abolishment of political correctness!

By now you may be thinking this is a political thread, but that is not my point. This was just to give you an insight to NZ.

Now for the main topic:
There is a university here that has a Maori name, but everything is taught in english. However- if you are not a Maori, you may not attend this university. ISN'T THAT RACIAL DISCRIMINATION? But because it is the majority being discriminated against, and not the minority, it is somehow not adressed.

Opinions, anyone?

[Nat Turner]

Political correctness is the secular form of fundamentalism. In other words, it's teh ghey.

[Danimal]

Same here, the aboriginals have received alot of money from the Australian Goverment.

Where the hell is it now?

[Nat Turner]

That's sad that your government does that though. Any policy that singles out a race is inherently racist.

[Shasta]

Well it's good to see I'm not the only one who thinks this is wrong. I'm all for equal right's, one people, etc, but this sort of overdoing political correctness is racist bullsh*t.

What's next?....

[Sulkdodds]

Positive discrimination is still discrimination. It's like, near me there's a 'black hospice' but if anyone setup a 'white hospice' there'd be trouble. Of course, the fact that the black hospice also accomodates white people is besides the point.

[Shasta]

Positive discrimination is still discrimination. It's like, near me there's a 'black hospice' but if anyone setup a 'white hospice' there'd be trouble. Of course, the fact that the black hospice also accomodates white people is besides the point.
Exactly. This Univeristy is even worse because it doesn't accomodate white people. I would love it if someone had the balls to set up a white university over here, just to argue the point, and hopefully put an official end to this particular saga. There are many more battles to be won. Did anyone know that the maoris have almost exclusive rights to all foreshores and seabeds around NZ? That means they can (and do) stop non-maoris from going to a beach, or from fishing/collecting seafood like mussels etc. Too many double standards. There is so much work to be done here for everyone to just get along and live together! Pity I'm too lazy.

[riomhaire]

Policitical correctness can often be not only bloody stupid but also racist.

[Cormeh]

The worst nonsense I've come across regarding political correctness is from a friend who works in a nursery.

She tells me they are not allowed to let the kids sing "Baa baa black sheep" because it is a racist song. Now THAT is lunacy people.

[CptStern]

sigh ..it's not about racism ..it's about providing resources for specific groups that may be underfunded or what have you. It's like saying the United Negro College fund is racist because it only helps poor black kids go to school or that the Jewish United fund is racist because they only raise funds for jews ...they provide a service for a specific group because that group may be under represented ...that's why they exist.

[MiccyNarc]

sigh ..it's not about racism ..it's about providing resources for specific groups that may be underfunded or what have you. It's like saying the United Negro College fund is racist because it only helps poor black kids go to school or that the Jewish United fund is racist because they only raise funds for jews ...they provide a service for a specific group because that group may be under represented ...that's why they exist.
Isn't that racist by saying that these people can only function if they get outside aid?

[Danimal]

Political correctness is so uptight these days, alot of people don't even know what racist is. I once said "Black cats bring bad-luck" and someone took it the wrong way... Somehow.

[riomhaire]

You aren't supposed to say boyfriend/girlfirend/husband/wife anymore on TV or radio for some stupid f*cking reason. You're supposed to say partner.

[Solaris]

Same here, the aboriginals have received alot of money from the Australian Goverment.

Where the hell is it now?

Well the Aboriginies were treated like sub humans by White Austrailians for hundreds of years, even more recently when they took children away from parents ect just becuase they were aboriginies. They deserve to be treated decently for once.

I have no problem with Political correctness, its just often exagerrated by teh media to make it look bad.

[CptStern]

Isn't that racist by saying that these people can only function if they get outside aid?


that's a bit of a stretch dont you think? I highly doubt the Untied Negro Fund had that in mind when they were formed

[Vegeta897]

Isn't that racist by saying that these people can only function if they get outside aid?Try asking the people in need who are benefiting from the charity.

Do you think they care?

[Shasta]

sigh ..it's not about racism ..it's about providing resources for specific groups that may be underfunded or what have you. It's like saying the United Negro College fund is racist because it only helps poor black kids go to school or that the Jewish United fund is racist because they only raise funds for jews ...they provide a service for a specific group because that group may be under represented ...that's why they exist.
There is no funding or free education at this place. It is not a charity- it's actually quite expensive to go there. I know what you mean by underfunded groups- our government (in it's wisdom) has made some sort of law or something so that ALL pacific islanders don't have to pay for any doctors bills. Isn't that like saying "OK, if you are samoan or any type of pacific islander, you are too useless to get a job and afford healthcare, and you are all ridden with disease, so get yourselfs checked out as much as you like, and we will pick up the tab."? Isn't any type of generalisation based on race, - whether it benefits them or not, racist? Aren't we all supposed to be equal in this day and age?

[Shasta]

Isn't that racist by saying that these people can only function if they get outside aid?
Try asking the people in need who are benefiting from the charity.

Do you think they care?
What if a white family is just as needy, but that charity turns them away because they are the wrong color? Isn't a needy person still needy no matter what color they are?

[CptStern]

There is no funding or free education at this place. It is not a charity- it's actually quite expensive to go there. I know what you mean by underfunded groups- our government (in it's wisdom) has made some sort of law or something so that ALL pacific islanders don't have to pay for any doctors bills. Isn't that like saying "OK, if you are samoan or any type of pacific islander, you are too useless to get a job and afford healthcare, and you are all ridden with disease, so get yourselfs checked out as much as you like, and we will pick up the tab."? Isn't any type of generalisation based on race, - whether it benefits them or not, racist? Aren't we all supposed to be equal in this day and age?


raising a specific group's level of care to be equal to other groups is not racism. What they're doing by giving them free healthcare is giving them a leg up so they can afford other necessities ..I'm willing to bet that the standard of living for a samoan is a lot less than for a white person on average

[Dan]

In general aboriginals have been specifically singled out and treated like shit in their native land for the last couple hundred years. They get cheated out of their land, and now it's racist and wrong to give special advantages to them? You can't just erase the past and forget about it like that, say everythings equal and fair. Because it isn't.

Look at the US, overall the black population is still one of the poorest segments of the country. Why is it like that? Don't give any crap that it's because there's any real difference in the people themsleves. It's because their parents and grandparents were poor and uneducated so much of the current generation is too. Why was that? Because blacks were specifically persecuted and treated like crap. That's why there are college scholarships only for black students, to try to make ammends. If equality was actually working, then natives, white people, all races, would be equally distributed throughout the economic layers of society. But we've got to fix the past to make that happen.

[Neo_Kuja]

... but then again, you can't punish the oppressor's current generation of people for a mistake that happened a long time ago. If that happened, most of Germany would be shackled up in irons and thrown in jail ...

[Nat Turner]

In general aboriginals have been specifically singled out and treated like shit in their native land for the last couple hundred years. They get cheated out of their land, and now it's racist and wrong to give special advantages to them?

Yes. The advantages should not discriminate on the basis of race, gender, age, or religion.

[Nat Turner]

raising a specific group's level of care to be equal to other groups is not racism. What they're doing by giving them free healthcare is giving them a leg up so they can afford other necessities ..I'm willing to bet that the standard of living for a samoan is a lot less than for a white person on average

Then why not give free healthcare to every poor person? Should someone who's white not get it while others can?

[CREMATOR666]

Political Correctness is giving me headaches, why do people have to make things so complicated. :|

[Nat Turner]

Political Correctness is giving me headaches, why do people have to make things so complicated. :|

Because certain people like to discriminate and hate the freedoms of speech and expression.

[CREMATOR666]

Yet there is a fine line between "moderate" and "extreme" political correctness, the latter in which I am referring to.

[Nat Turner]

Yet there is a fine line between "moderate" and "extreme" political correctness, the latter in which I am referring to.

All political correctness wishes to impose on people's freedoms, and it's all wrong.

[Shasta]

... but then again, you can't punish the oppressor's current generation of people for a mistake that happened a long time ago. If that happened, most of Germany would be shackled up in irons and thrown in jail ...
Very good point- some people have been losing land (taken by the government) that they worked hard to buy, so it can be given back to barely existant Tribes.

You are all making good points for both sides (I'm impressed at the sensible and self-controlled way this is being debated)

However- isn't the very definition of racism treating an individual or group of people diferently, based entirely on their ethnic group or skin color? I know some very rich Samoans who now (because of the law thing I mentioned earlier) don't have to pay for healthcare. Is that fair? Why can't a poor person be a person who happens to be black, or white, or whatever, and not an ethnic group? Why can't any kind of help be based on individual circumstances, not race? I almost feel punished for being white in this overly politically-correct society. It is starting to create negative and racist feelings over here, because we see handouts being given to people based on race, not individual circumstances. You can understand how that makes people feel who don't fit into these categories, just because they are the wrong color.

[Nat Turner]

I know some very rich Samoans who now (because of the law thing I mentioned earlier) don't have to pay for healthcare. Is that fair? Why can't a poor person be a person who happens to be black, or white, or whatever, and not an ethnic group? Why can't any kind of help be based on individual circumstances, not race?

Exactly. Help out the poor in general, not only the poor who have a certain appearance or race (i.e. Samoans). I just find it sad that people want to use racism to fight racism.

[CREMATOR666]

Giving minorities (or discriminated people) an advantage over others can still be considered racism to a degree since it is like acknowledging that they are different. It's kinda like that affirmative action thing. :|

[Nat Turner]

Giving minorities (or discriminated people) an advantage over others can still be considered racism to a degree since it is like acknowledging that they are different. It's kinda like that affirmative action thing. :|

Yeah. Basically, these policies deny stuff from people of other races who are also in need. If you're white and poor, shouldn't you be treated the same as someone who's Samoan and poor?

[pomegranate]

The thing is that govt policy is intended to weigh up against the negative discrimination racial minorities suffer from society in general. White people don't suffer from cultural racism in the countries where they are the majority, minorities do. So you could say that (e.g.) black poor people are worse off than white poor people in, say, the USA due to discrimination, lack of opportunities and social factors specific to black people.
Govt intervention based on race is intended to address this kind of situation.

[Nat Turner]

The thing is that govt policy is intended to weigh up against the negative discrimination racial minorities suffer from society in general. White people don't suffer from cultural racism in the countries where they are the majority, minorities do. So you could say that (e.g.) black poor people are worse off than white poor people in, say, the USA due to discrimination, lack of opportunities and social factors specific to black people.
Govt intervention based on race is intended to address this kind of situation.

So you think it's fair to give a black guy money just because he's black?

[CREMATOR666]

So you think it's fair to give a black guy money just because he's black?

Touche

[pomegranate]

It's not as simple as the fact that's he's black though, is it?

[CREMATOR666]

It's not as simple as the fact that's he's black though, is it?

Yeah but still I would argue that we should counter discrimination by treating them as equals rather than treating them with privileges above the norm. :)

[pomegranate]

Well, duh.

[Shasta]

It's not as simple as the fact that's he's black though, is it?
If we truly want to get rid of racism, it is that simple. No special tratment based on race or color. At all.

[CREMATOR666]

Well, duh.

IF it were that obvious then we would not be having this conversation in the first place :rolleyes:

[pomegranate]

If we truly want to get rid of racism, it is that simple. No special tratment based on race or color. At all.

But in an unequal society (ie rich and poor aside from race), unless you're going to start brainwashing people, there will still be an effective element of racism in society. Getting rid of government assistance for minorities is not going to stop that.

[Shasta]

IF it were that obvious then we would not be having this conversation in the first place :rolleyes:
Why can't it be that obvious?

[CREMATOR666]

It is not that simple after all to get rid of racism is it?

[Nat Turner]

But in an unequal society (ie rich and poor aside from race), unless you're going to start brainwashing people, there will still be an effective element of racism in society. Getting rid of government assistance for minorities is not going to stop that.

Even if there is, the people will be prosecuted if they do anything racist that's illegal. You still shouldn't cater to specific groups at different levels through the government. Even though your intentions are good, this is the kind of thought that leads to slavery.

[pomegranate]

How do you reckon that?

[Nat Turner]

How do you reckon that?

Because all racial discrimination at a governmental level is wrong. I still don't understand why you like discrimination.

[pomegranate]

I think I already explained it. You saying that it leads to slavery didn't invalidate what I said.

[Nat Turner]

I think I already explained it. You saying that it leads to slavery didn't invalidate what I said.

If you have different groups of people being treated differently on the basis of skin color, you can justify racism at any level by saying "it's better for society".

[pomegranate]

I don't see how that follows what we were just talking about, please stick to one point at a time...

[RakuraiTenjin]

It is discrimination and not right but if it's a private institution it's perfectly within their rights to do. Well at least here in the US.

If it's a public institution, they're not allowed (again at least here).

[Shasta]

It is discrimination and not right but if it's a private institution it's perfectly within their rights to do. Well at least here in the US.

If it's a public institution, they're not allowed (again at least here).
Wow. I didn't know that. I didn't think anyone was allowed to discriminate at all.

[Shasta]

I don't see how that follows what we were just talking about, please stick to one point at a time...
I think the point of this thread was to say "how can institutions and governments encourage, condone, and use racisim in any form, including helping groups based on race? Is it right?"

I think that as long as racial statistics are provided all the time, ie: 5% of the populatioin are unemployed- 70% of unemployed people are black, 15% are white, 15% are asian etc, then public reaction is going to follow. If instead it just said, 5% of the country is unemployed, isn't that what matters?

[the_rebel_medic]

pfftt, you should see the racial discrimination in sydney ATM, we have riots up there FFS.

[Dan]

The reason that the government should be helping mistreated minorities rather than all of the poor people is that those minorities have been specifically pushed into the lower economic level of society by that same government in the past.

You can try to help all the poor people, but there are always going to be an upper class and a lower class as long as we have property and ownership and wealth.

Lets take the case of two bums on the street. These represent the general circumstances. There will always be people who don't fit the stereotype, but were not dealing with specifics. So one bum is white, call him A. He had a well off middle class family but didn't get along with his parents, so he ran away to try and sell crack on the corner. The other bum, call him B is a native of the country. His father is an alcoholic and he or maybe his father before hiim was taken away from his parents as a child and ****ed up in residential schools and denied an education. So bum B follows his dad's example and becomes an alcoholic too. A's situation is a product of society. There's always going to be runaways and crackheads. B's situation is a direct product of the governments racist policies 100 years ago. If the government has a sense or responsibility they will try to fix what they have done wrong and help all of those natives.

If a black person is a millionaire now, maybe that person could have been a billionaire if his grandparents weren't oppressed. If the government takes responsibility for its past actions and tries to address what it has done. Then on average, it might be able to equal things out and level the playing field for everyone regardless of race.

Think of it this way. A kid is being a jerk, he beats you up every lunch hour and steals your money. 10 or 20 years later you both grow up and if you're not doing so well in life, maybe it's because of the crappy childhood you had at his hands. Maybe you live on the street now. Well if that kid realizes that he was a jerk and if he's a good person or he wants to appear to be a good person he'll apologize, like many governments have done in modern times for past actions. And if that kid is responsible what he should do is try to help you out now to make ammends for what he did before. If he's not responsible he might just say "hey the pasts the past" live with it. And if he's still a jerk he'll keep bullying other people that he has power over. Get the analogy? He can't help out every bum on the street that he sees, but he's responsible for putting you there, so he "ought" to help you out.

[Shasta]

The reason that the government should be helping mistreated minorities rather than all of the poor people is that those minorities have been specifically pushed into the lower economic level of society by that same government in the past.

You can try to help all the poor people, but there are always going to be an upper class and a lower class as long as we have property and ownership and wealth.

Lets take the case of two bums on the street. These represent the general circumstances. There will always be people who don't fit the stereotype, but were not dealing with specifics. So one bum is white, call him A. He had a well off middle class family but didn't get along with his parents, so he ran away to try and sell crack on the corner. The other bum, call him B is a native of the country. His father is an alcoholic and he or maybe his father before hiim was taken away from his parents as a child and ****ed up in residential schools and denied an education. So bum B follows his dad's example and becomes an alcoholic too. A's situation is a product of society. There's always going to be runaways and crackheads. B's situation is a direct product of the governments racist policies 100 years ago. If the government has a sense or responsibility they will try to fix what they have done wrong and help all of those natives.

If a black person is a millionaire now, maybe that person could have been a billionaire if his grandparents weren't oppressed. If the government takes responsibility for its past actions and tries to address what it has done. Then on average, it might be able to equal things out and level the playing field for everyone regardless of race.

Think of it this way. A kid is being a jerk, he beats you up every lunch hour and steals your money. 10 or 20 years later you both grow up and if you're not doing so well in life, maybe it's because of the crappy childhood you had at his hands. Maybe you live on the street now. Well if that kid realizes that he was a jerk and if he's a good person or he wants to appear to be a good person he'll apologize, like many governments have done in modern times for past actions. And if that kid is responsible what he should do is try to help you out now to make ammends for what he did before. If he's not responsible he might just say "hey the pasts the past" live with it. And if he's still a jerk he'll keep bullying other people that he has power over. Get the analogy? He can't help out every bum on the street that he sees, but he's responsible for putting you there, so he "ought" to help you out.

Very well put, but I don't agree. Over here, tribes are being given millions of dollars each, plus as I said earlier, they have been given loads of land, and now control of all foreshore and seabeds. Isn't that too much already, as now non-maoris are very restricted in those areas, and must apply for a special license to take any seafood from our beaches. When will it end? I didn't do anything wrong, and neither did my parents, or theirs, who came to this country. Why should I be punished, just because I'm white?

[riomhaire]

It's not as simple as the fact that's he's black though, is it?
Well that's the bloody point. Government legeslaton shouldn't take into acount if someone is black or not.

[RakuraiTenjin]

Wow. I didn't know that. I didn't think anyone was allowed to discriminate at all.
It would be an infringement on the discriminator's rights to do that. I find what they have to say to be disgusting and horrid, but you can't ban it. If someone has a private organization there is no way you can force them to accept someone they don't wish to. Only when it's public.