Phillips at it again...promotes racism.

Van_Dammesque

Van_Dammesque

Van_Dammesque

Associate
Joined
4 May 2004
Posts
2,215
Location
NE England
Link

He may quit becasue of no ethnic minorities in the cabinet and fewer women than under Blair, maybe Brown has picked the best people for the job (which is good imo). This, for me, is his first real test of what his social policies/interference (or maybe double standards) is all about.

In the article it also shows how Cameron has elected people from ethnic minorities, this may backlash against the tory voters, the cons are turning into New Labour '97 day by day!

Why should ethnic minorities be picked because THEY ARE ethnic minorities? Why does this man claim "equality" if it is always detrimental to the ethnic majority? Claiming your skin colour or religion has benefits over a person with equal abilities but do not have the same skin colour or religion is discrimination.

What do people make of this?

I actually believe it is good on two fronts:
1. It shows that Philips may resign, good, he is a racist.

2. It may bring home to the cabinet that there are people who want to oust them out of there jobs because they are white. No doubt the cabinet, sitting in their ivory towers, have no real inclination of what is happening to every middle/working class person in the UK. Maybe this will "bring it home to them"!
 
*Inserts generic pre-disgust at where this thread will eventually head*

I definitely agree that people should be hired based on their abilities and talents, not their ethnic origin.

One question however, if ministers are supposed to represent the people, then perhaps there should be ministers from the various ethnicities included as a quota? (I don't necessarily agree with that, I just said it to provoke reasonable debate).
 
ArmyofHarmony said:
I want the best people for the job, but I guess it should represent the whole population too... makes sense anyway
Click to expand...
Cannot a white man be representative of a black community? If not then your subscribing to superiority of black skin when compared to white. Also your implying that a black community cannot be represented by a white because of the colour of skin, ultimately implying that the ethnic minority communities are themselves inherently racist.

If it IS the case that communities need racial representation then it shows the absolute segregation of the UK along racial lines. i.e. we have countries within a country.
 
A lot of public sector employers say they're hiring more ethnics to "be more representative". Funnily enough this doesn't appear to be helping me...I guess they're only after racists :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Van_Dammesque said:
Cannot a white man be representative of a black community? If not then your subscribing to superiority of black skin when compared to white. Also your implying that a black community cannot be represented by a white because of the colour of skin, ultimately implying that the ethnic minority communities are themselves inherently racist.

If it IS the case that communities need racial representation then it shows the absolute segregation of the UK along racial lines. i.e. we have countries within a country.
Click to expand...

Would an English man who speaks no french be a good representative for the French?

A very extreme way of looking at the argument, but familiarity and similaritiy with the community can work wonders.


Edited to add the full quote by van
 
Last edited:
mrk1@1 said:
A very extreme way of looking at the argument, but familiarity and similaritiy with the community can work wonders.
Click to expand...

I may be non-white, but I probably have more in common with the average white person than with the community that spawned me...
 
Morba said:
extreme and wrong. you cannot compare the 2.
Click to expand...

The point was, in my post, in case the subtlety was missed, you need someone who can relate to their target audience.

What ever ethnic background they come from the desired outcome is the same.
 
mrk1@1 said:
The point was, in my post, in case the subtlety was missed, you need someone who can relate to their target audience.

What ever ethnic background they come from the desired outcome is the same.
Click to expand...

while i can see what you were trying to say, the comparison was between a language (which can be learnt) and colour of skin (something you are born with). for that reason you cannot compare the 2.
 
mrk1@1 said:
Would an English man who speaks no french be a good representative for the French?

A very extreme way of looking at the argument, but familiarity and similaritiy with the community can work wonders.
Click to expand...

That's a perfectly valid point... representatives are best served by being someone who are identified with by those they represent. It goes a long way into creating a solid foundation of trust and understanding.
 
Morba said:
while i can see what you were trying to say, the comparison was between a language (which can be learnt) and colour of skin (something you are born with). for that reason you cannot compare the 2.
Click to expand...

The use of the language in communication (as per my earlier post) is a very clear analogy of the situation and much simpler than trying to differentiate between ethnic background and skin colour.

What I was not saying and I think, I may have been misunderstood, is that you don't necessarily need a white person to represent a white community, black to represent a black community but what you need is someone who can properly communicate and fully understand the community/situation.

edited as my grammar sucks today
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom