• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Racial Discrimination Sometimes Justified?

Is racial discrimination sometimes justified?

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 16.7%
  • No

    Votes: 15 83.3%

  • Total voters
    18
No let us ask is it your belief or not.

So you are saying that racial discrimination is never justified?

I have said I think it is a very difficult question.
 
I don't know Wake. Who or what is that?

For the third time, I think it is a very difficult question.
1. Don't worry about it for now.
2. How about you do the best you can to answer it. When you ask people to answer a question, it's a courtesy to do it yourself.
 
1. Don't worry about it for now.

Ok

2. How about you do the best you can to answer it. When you ask people to answer a question, it's a courtesy to do it yourself.

As a black male I want to feel that it is never justified. On an intellectual level I have a difficult time finding a good reason why it is NEVER justified. Therefore, to me, it is a difficult question.
 
So you are saying that racial discrimination is never justified?

I have said I think it is a very difficult question.

Discrimination justifiable- No-
You used an example of a fellow coming out of a store, beaten and robbed by blacks.
I am white, I see a gang of whites that look like trouble, I cross the street or turn around.
I am one that is aware of his surroundings.
 
Anyone is free to discriminate in his private affairs against anyone he wants, for any reason whatever. Nothing says we have to live cheek by jowl with people of another race, especially if we know a disproportionate number of those people are criminals. We would probably want to associate with a person of that race only if we knew that person was all right.

From a legal standpoint, nothing in the Constitution absolutely prohibits government from discriminating by race. But if an action does discriminate by race, it will be unconstitutional unless the government can show it is necessary to achieve some compelling government purpose. That is very hard to do, but not impossible. The best example is probably President Roosevelt's internment of persons of Japanese ancestry during WWII, which the Supreme Court upheld in the Korematsu case.

If a police agency needed someone to infiltrate a white supremacist biker gang that was trafficking in drugs and guns, would it be justified in giving this plum job and the large pay bonus that went with it to a white officer instead of a more experienced, higher-ranking black officer? Isn't race discrimination always wrong?
 
Anyone is free to discriminate in his private affairs against anyone he wants, for any reason whatever. Nothing says we have to live cheek by jowl with people of another race, especially if we know a disproportionate number of those people are criminals. We would probably want to associate with a person of that race only if we knew that person was all right.

From a legal standpoint, nothing in the Constitution absolutely prohibits government from discriminating by race. But if an action does discriminate by race, it will be unconstitutional unless the government can show it is necessary to achieve some compelling government purpose. That is very hard to do, but not impossible. The best example is probably President Roosevelt's internment of persons of Japanese ancestry during WWII, which the Supreme Court upheld in the Korematsu case.

If a police agency needed someone to infiltrate a white supremacist biker gang that was trafficking in drugs and guns, would it be justified in giving this plum job and the large pay bonus that went with it to a white officer instead of a more experienced, higher-ranking black officer? Isn't race discrimination always wrong?

Don't let me put words in your mouth, but you feel that racial discrimination is sometimes justified. Right?
 
Discrimination justifiable- No-
You used an example of a fellow coming out of a store, beaten and robbed by blacks.
I am white, I see a gang of whites that look like trouble, I cross the street or turn around.
I am one that is aware of his surroundings.

Why not if there are actual differences?
 
Don't let me put words in your mouth, but you feel that racial discrimination is sometimes justified. Right?

Of course I do. I also believe we should profile anyone entering the U.S. from certain predominately Muslim countries, and feel no need to apologize about it.
 
Why not if there are actual differences?

I decided based my perception of threat, past experiences, but not on color. Your example is wide open for interpretation. A number of variable come into play.
Note- Appears this OP & your questions is similar to being a lab rat in some class experiment.
 
Of course I do. I also believe we should profile anyone entering the U.S. from certain predominately Muslim countries, and feel no need to apologize about it.

No need to apologize. Thanks for the honest answer. That is not to say that I necessarily agree with you tho.
 
I decided based my perception of threat, past experiences, but not on color. Your example is wide open for interpretation. A number of variable come into play.

Wide open for interpretation? A number of variables come into play? Please elaborate.
 
But why would some individual discrimination NOT be justifiable IF the differences do indeed exist?

Hm. Well, why would it be?



[[It is worth noting in this context that SCOTUS has said that it can be, but in reverse - specifically in the context of written tests for advancement. Blacks, I suppose, they felt, were too stupid, or too incapable, or too 'something' to succeed on their own, and so tests which produce "disparate impact" are illegal. That is less "discrimination against blacks for having lower group IQ scores" than it is "discrimination against non-blacks for having higher group IQ scores", but it seems germane to the question.]]​



The kind of discrimination I can see being justified is usually surrounding questions of security. For example, I believe it is insane that we insist on searching 80 year old grandmothers from Idaho on our "random list" while waving through Abu McJihad returning from Yemen after his adult conversion to Islam. That is a form of discrimination that I think is justified because of the competing rights involved. One example pertaining to blacks (though not to intelligence) also pertains to security. Young black males in large cities tend to have a hard time hailing cabs at night, as cab drivers perceive a greater possibility that they will be robbed. This came out a while back and everyone was quick to cry "Racism!" until we found out that black cab drivers also avoided picking up young black males at night in large cities, perceiving a greater possibility that they would be robbed.

Not knowing the stats on cab robberies at the time, I don't know how well I could defend that rationally - but the important point is that both are cases of discrimination based on risk, which I feel can be legitimate (see first example). That is also why I oppose the application of "disparate impact" rulings especially to functions that deal with security, such as fire-fighters and police.
 
Wide open for interpretation? A number of variables come into play? Please elaborate.

How many,are they threatening, personal experience, location, are their others on the street- are you alone, and on and on.
Now please answer my lab rat question.
 
One example pertaining to blacks (though not to intelligence) also pertains to security. Young black males in large cities tend to have a hard time hailing cabs at night, as cab drivers perceive a greater possibility that they will be robbed. This came out a while back and everyone was quick to cry "Racism!" until we found out that black cab drivers also avoided picking up young black males at night in large cities, perceiving a greater possibility that they would be robbed.

Not knowing the stats on cab robberies at the time, I don't know how well I could defend that rationally - but the important point is that both are cases of discrimination based on risk, which I feel can be legitimate (see first example).

Now we are getting somewhere. In your example, the assessment of "risk" is based on race. So do you think it is possible that sometimes racial discrimination is justified?

BTW, I wish I had thought of that example. It is a good one and illustrates why the question is indeed very difficult.
 
Last edited:
How many,are they threatening, personal experience, location, are their others on the street- are you alone, and on and on.

If you read statistics that indicate that blacks disproportinately commit crime and you had been robbed by a group of blacks, when you saw a group of blacks that you did not know, would you not consider the fact that they are black?

Now please answer my lab rat question.

What exactly is your lab rat question?
 
If you read statistics that indicate that blacks disproportinately commit crime and you had been robbed by a group of blacks, when you saw a group of blacks that you did not know, would you not consider the fact that they are black?



What exactly is your lab rat question?

What is the purpose of the OP?
What information are you looking for.Do you need confirmation on something?
 
Now we are getting somewhere. In your example, the assessment of "risk" is based on race. So do you think it is possible that sometimes racial discrimination is justified?

BTW, I wish I had thought of that example. It is a good one and illustrates why the question is indeed very difficult.

:shrug: I suppose it is possible - but it would be situational. (Law Enforcement searching for serial killers, for example, focus on white males. They do not focus on a race/gender dynamic when searching for car thieves, because the situation does not suggest it in the latter like it does in the former). Limited-time decisions dealing with risk to others seems like it can, in some situations, justify discrimination. I cannot think of a decision that would justify discrimination based off of group IQ. Can you?
 
What is the purpose of the OP?
What information are you looking for.Do you need confirmation on something?

I answered the question that is the subject of this thread as honestly as I could.

My question to you is, what do you think the purpose of the OP is? What information do you think I am looking for? Do you think I need confirmation on something? Would you ask those questions if I were not black? Are your questions in themselves a form of racial discrimination that is justified?
 
I answered the question that is the subject of this thread as honestly as I could.

My question to you is, what do you think the purpose of the OP is? What information do you think I am looking for? Do you think I need confirmation on something? Would you ask those questions if I were not black? Are your questions in themselves a form of racial discrimination that is justified?

How in hell would I know what color you are?
How are my questions a form of discrimination?
I asked questions, did not needed questions on top of questions.
 
:shrug: I suppose it is possible - but it would be situational. (Law Enforcement searching for serial killers, for example, focus on white males. They do not focus on a race/gender dynamic when searching for car thieves, because the situation does not suggest it in the latter like it does in the former). Limited-time decisions dealing with risk to others seems like it can, in some situations, justify discrimination. I cannot think of a decision that would justify discrimination based off of group IQ. Can you?

I am not saying that it is sometimes justified, but that indeed may be possible. As far as IQ goes, if you are taking a class on the calculus of vector fields, who would you be more prone to go to for reliable help, if you didn't know anything about any of the people in the class, an Asian person or a black person? Now to be totally honest, I don't believe mathematical aptitude makes someone intelligent. I am just saying that to give an example that MAY be easily understood.
 
How in hell would I know what color you are?
How are my questions a form of discrimination?
I asked questions, did not needed questions on top of questions.

Ok. Sorry to bother you.
 
I am not saying that it is sometimes justified, but that indeed may be possible. As far as IQ goes, if you are taking a class on the calculus of vector fields, who would you be more prone to go to for reliable help, if you didn't know anything about any of the people in the class, an Asian person or a black person? Now to be totally honest, I don't believe mathematical aptitude makes someone intelligent. I am just saying that to give an example that MAY be easily understood.

See, the artificiality of the situation is problematic - I'd be most likely to go to a TA, or the professor. Beyond that, I would go to someone I know.

I think you are additionally speaking to unconscious discrimination rather than conscious or deliberate discrimination.
 
See, the artificiality of the situation is problematic - I'd be most likely to go to a TA, or the professor. Beyond that, I would go to someone I know.

Yes, but depending on the class you may not know someone who could give a reliable answer. What if the TA isn't available and you needed some help right away and another person in the class is your only chance? I understand it's a hypothetical, but it's relevant. That was one I thought of off the top of my head.

I think you are additionally speaking to unconscious discrimination rather than conscious or deliberate discrimination.

I am including unconscious and unintentional discrimination, although I am not restricting it to that.
 
Yes, but depending on the class you may not know someone who could give a reliable answer. What if the TA isn't available and you needed some help right away and another person in the class is your only chance? I understand it's a hypothetical, but it's relevant. That was one I thought of off the top of my head.

:shrug: I would probably either ask the person sitting next to me, or, if we weren't sitting in class, who seemed most open and available. The last decision might play into stereotypes, but I wouldn't be able to observe it and certainly wouldn't be able to decide to perform the act of discrimination because of it.

I am including unconscious and unintentional discrimination, although I am not restricting it to that.

Since we are looking at the question of justification, however, the two are unlike. Deliberate discrimination is the result of a decision-making process that can be said to be just or unjust. Unconscious discrimination (we tend to think that good-looking people are smarter) is not the result of a decision-making process that can be said to be just or unjust.

This is particularly true if you are attempting to bring collected ethnic statistics (such as IQ scores) to bear.
 
Back
Top Bottom