• 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
MildSteel said:
I wanted to see exactly what your position is.

Ok. But if there is evidence to support the notion, then why would some amount of discrimination NOT be justifiable, at least at a personal level? If the differences are indeed there, it would appear that one would be merely dealing with reality as it exists. Don't you think to do otherwise would be unnatural?
Click to expand...

several reasons come to mind and I am sure there are others:

1 - Racial discrimination unfairly targets a race making individuals in that race recipients of treatment that they may not deserve having done nothing to deserve it.
2 - it establishes that we will not treat individuals as individuals on their own merit or actions or record but on perceived qualities of a race which may or may not apply to them and may be irrelevant tot he treatment given to them.
3 - it puts us on a very very dangerous path whose end is well established in history through things I have already mentioned such as genocide, slavery and other forms of systematic abuse.
 
haymarket said:
several reasons come to mind and I am sure there are others:

1 - Racial discrimination unfairly targets a race making individuals in that race recipients of treatment that they may not deserve having done nothing to deserve it.
2 - it establishes that we will not treat individuals as individuals on their own merit or actions or record but on perceived qualities of a race which may or may not apply to them and may be irrelevant tot he treatment given to them.
3 - it puts us on a very very dangerous path whose end is well established in history through things I have already mentioned such as genocide, slavery and other forms of systematic abuse.
Click to expand...

Ok, let's accept that. But don't you think that comes at the cost of ignoring reality, and thus acting in an unnatural way?

Over and above that, if the distinctions are in reality there, will not the human mind pick up on the differences anyway, and at least, at a subconscious level, force the individual to discriminate?
 
MildSteel said:
So if there is some IQ differentiation, why is not some discrimination justified? Isn't that just dealing with the world as it is?
Click to expand...

No. The existence of different peaks on the various (to use your point of reference) bell curves does not justify individual discrimination based on a likelihood of a certain IQ - there is no overriding concern for safety, or any other kind of thing that might do so. The only possible venue I can think of would be positive, community-based discrimination - for example, programs aimed at encouraging reading among young children who may not get such encouragement at home might wisely be aimed where they are more likely to impact minority communities who are more likely to currently lack it.
 
cpwill said:
No. The existence of different peaks on the various (to use your point of reference) bell curves does not justify individual discrimination based on a likelihood of a certain IQ - there is no overriding concern for safety, or any other kind of thing that might do so. The only possible venue I can think of would be positive, community-based discrimination - for example, programs aimed at encouraging reading among young children who may not get such encouragement at home might wisely be aimed where they are more likely to impact minority communities who are more likely to currently lack it.
Click to expand...

But why would some individual discrimination NOT be justifiable IF the differences do indeed exist?
 
MildSteel said:
Ok, let's accept that. But don't you think that comes at the cost of ignoring reality, and thus acting in an unnatural way?

Over and above that, if the distinctions are in reality there, will not the human mind pick up on the differences anyway, and at least, at a subconscious level, force the individual to discriminate?
Click to expand...

Everything has a cost. But the cost of an open policy of legal discrimination is one we cannot accept. The results - slavery, genocide, different types of systematic abuse are unacceptable.
 
haymarket said:
Everything has a cost. But the cost of an open policy of legal discrimination is one we cannot accept. The results - slavery, genocide, different types of systematic abuse are unacceptable.
Click to expand...

That's ok, but what about at the individual level, is it really possible to NOT discriminate IF the differences do indeed exist?
 
MildSteel said:
That's ok, but what about at the individual level, is it really possible to NOT discriminate IF the differences do indeed exist?
Click to expand...

We all exist in a society with others. There is no such thing as simply discriminating against an individual because of their race or nationality and having it protected by law and expecting it to stop with just an individual. Its a false premise.
 
jamesrage said:
Maybe a niche porn.For example if you are running a website that only has black chicks on it then obviously you are not going to hire any white, Indian or whatever else porn actress.
Click to expand...

You would have to have White or any other non-Black chicks apply and be told "we don't hire anyone but Black chicks here" for there to be discrimination. Even then, discrimination would be difficult to prove.

But have some Lesbian White chicks apply and be denied and watch the the **** fly.
 
haymarket said:
We all exist in a society with others. There is no such thing as simply discriminating against an individual because of their race or nationality and having it protected by law and expecting it to stop with just an individual. Its a false premise.
Click to expand...

Let's look at an earlier example. Suppose that a person sees statistics that show blacks, relative to their numbers, are disproportionately involved in crime. Suppose that person is walking down the street and robbed by a group of black men. Would not that person be justified in avoiding groups of black men in the future? Isn't that discrimination that has some justification?
 
MildSteel said:
Let's look at an earlier example. Suppose that a person sees statistics that show blacks, relative to their numbers, are disproportionately involved in crime. Suppose that person is walking down the street and robbed by a group of black men. Would not that person be justified in avoiding groups of black men in the future? Isn't that discrimination that has some justification?
Click to expand...

Is that an example of what we have come to call discrimination in the law or is that an example of what others would call street smarts?
 
haymarket said:
Is that an example of what we have come to call discrimination in the law or is that an example of what others would call street smarts?
Click to expand...

When I speak of racial discrimination, I am not necessarily referring to discrimination in the strict legal sense, I am talking about a broader sense. So isn't that discrimination that has some justification?
 
Last edited:
MildSteel said:
When I speak of racial discrimination, I am not necessarily referring to discrimination in the strict legal sense, I am talking about a broader sense. So isn't discrimination that has some justification?
Click to expand...

People discriminate every day and it is necessary to survive. One must discriminate between food which is healthy and nourishing and consuming something which is the opposite. So let us not overuse an overly broad meaning of the word DISCRIMINATE.
 
haymarket said:
People discriminate every day and it is necessary to survive. One must discriminate between food which is healthy and nourishing and consuming something which is the opposite. So let us not overuse an overly broad meaning of the word DISCRIMINATE.
Click to expand...

Indeed they do discriminate. Furthermore, don't you think that the person who avoids groups of black men in the future is practicing racial discrimination that has some justification?
 
MildSteel said:
Indeed they do discriminate. Furthermore, don't you think that the person who avoids groups of black men in the future is practicing racial discrimination that has some justification?
Click to expand...

I do not consider an act like avoidance on a street that you provided as an example of the discrimination we are talking about as it is overly broad and does not apply to the context of the discussion.
 
haymarket said:
I do not consider an act like avoidance on a street that you provided as an example of the discrimination we are talking about as it is overly broad and does not apply to the context of the discussion.
Click to expand...

It is not overly broad because racial discrimination is to discriminate based on race. It is not illegal for the person to think, there is a group of black men, they may rob me, therefore I will avoid them.
 
MildSteel said:
Let's look at an earlier example. Suppose that a person sees statistics that show blacks, relative to their numbers, are disproportionately involved in crime. Suppose that person is walking down the street and robbed by a group of black men. Would not that person be justified in avoiding groups of black men in the future? Isn't that discrimination that has some justification?
Click to expand...

Let's say that 86% of white folks are murdered by another white person - should whites avoid white folks?

Let's say that 93% of black folks are murdered by another black person - should blacks avoid black folks?

Statistically, you are far safer by avoiding contact with those of your own race. ;)
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Let's say that 86% of white folks are murdered by another white person - should whites avoid white folks?

Let's say that 93% of black folks are murdered by another black person - should blacks avoid black folks?

Statistically, you are far safer by avoiding contact with those of your own race. ;)
Click to expand...

So you are saying that racial discrimination is sometimes justified. Right?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
No, I am saying that caution is in order at all times.
Click to expand...

Is not caution, in this instance, discrimination based on race? If the person in the scenario avoids a group of black men, because based on what he has read and his experience he feels that he is in danger from groups of black men, how can that not be discrimination based on race?
 
MildSteel said:
Is not caution, in this instance, discrimination based on race? If the person in the scenario avoids a group of black men, because based on what he has read and his experience he feels that he is in danger from groups of black men, how can that not be discrimination based on race?
Click to expand...

How is avoiding someone discriminating against them? In your example, what was denied to that group of black men - the pleasure of your proximity?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
How is avoiding someone discriminating against them? In your example, what was denied to that group of black men - the pleasure of your proximity?
Click to expand...

In the example it is discrimination, although it is not illegal, because the person is avoiding them based on the fact that they are black. Isn't it justified for him to do so based on what he has read and his experience?
 
MildSteel said:
Is not caution, in this instance, discrimination based on race? If the person in the scenario avoids a group of black men, because based on what he has read and his experience he feels that he is in danger from groups of black men, how can that not be discrimination based on race?
Click to expand...

Seriously?
If I avoid driving around in a neighborhood because my chances of being shot are increased tenfold, I am discriminating? Am I obligated to put myself in a dangerous situation just so that people won't think I am discriminating against them? Really? This is pretty laughable. Omg.
 
MildSteel said:
So you are saying that racial discrimination is sometimes justified. Right?
Click to expand...
Every single person in this thread knows that you have an ulterior motive. It would be helpful if you started by making an actual argument instead of trying to lead people into making the argument you obviously want them to make.

You actually remind me of another poster that used be here : Wake. He would start threads in a similar manner. Hm.
 
lizzie said:
Seriously?
If I avoid driving around in a neighborhood because my chances of being shot are increased tenfold, I am discriminating? Am I obligated to put myself in a dangerous situation just so that people won't think I am discriminating against them? Really? This is pretty laughable. Omg.
Click to expand...

If you avoid driving around a neighborhood because it is a black neighborhood and you therefore think that your chances of being shot are increased tenfold, you are discriminating based on race. It is not illegal, but it is discrimination nonetheless. The question is this, is such discrimination sometimes justified?
 
lizzie said:
Not at a legal level....
Click to expand...

It depends, doesn't it? I mean, we have, to name a few, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (which one would have thought would have changed its name by now to the National Association for the Advancement of African Americans, or NAAAA). How do you advance colored folk unless you discriminate? And what about the United Negro Collage Fund? How do you legally allocate college funds to negroes unless you discriminate? Then there's the Miss Black America Beauty Pageant. What do you think the chances of a snowflake-skinned Scandinavian are of winning that one? So it's disingenuous and hypocritical for liberals to claim on the one hand that discrimination is bad and unjustified when white people do it but fine and dandy when blacks do it. And when a white person points out the hypocrisy of it he's branded as a bigot and hatemonger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom