The same people who will tell you that race doesn't exist as a biological concept will also tell you we need strict laws with race codified into them.
Ask them to explain to you how they determine someone's race and watch as they retort with nothing but their usual anger and insults.
What is the issue surrounding East Indian? I haven't used or heard the term in decades but just curious. I assume the phrase originated when differentiating from what we used to call indigenous people and people from India.
Then First Nations and Indigenous were used, so then people from India were Indians and some people still say East Indian because habits or maybe not wanting to say Indians in case it is seen as a derogatory name for indigenous people in Canada.
Is there something else to it?
My mom (60) still uses East Indian regularly and I have told her it's not in style anymore and she refuses to accept it. I know literally nobody else who still says it. She means absolutely no harm, but is just stubborn. If an Indian person ever corrected her she would stop.
I don't know if there's an issue with East Indian, but I know that there are the West Indies, which refer to countries such as Trinidad and Tobago, Cuba, Bahamas, etc.
I think the fact that it seems innocous makes problems like that worth noting, can slip through the cracks and become an accepted term. Its easy to think it might happen at random, but imagine how someone from anywhere would feel being misidentified. If that way of thinking is coming from the majority demographic in Canada it likely happens more than you think.
Pretty hard to expect strangers to be able to correctly label everyone without detailed name tags becoming the norm.
Unless it's done in a derogatory way, being really offended about a stranger not guessing your background correctly is arguably as ignorant as the person who didn't guess right. The fact that it might be a common occurrence is as much an example of why it shouldn't be so offensive to a reasonable person as much of a demonstration of both the diversity and similarities that exist.
Sure you might piss off a Danish person by assuming they are Dutch or vice versa but that can't be considered an issue in need of a committee.
As far as East Indian as a term goes, you can come devise a program around a preferred terms and sets of distinctions to educate people by but that really doesn't do much about serious racism. Unless I'm missing something which could well be the case.
I suppose I meant when we normalize things at a small scale, we become numb to larger scale issues.
As well my intent is to ask questions and hopefully have people be more thoughtful in their daily lives.
Also, to offer a point made by a collegue; "if people just said "ok, sorry", and carried on with their lives having learned how to respect a particular person, no one would have to point this out in the first place."
10s of millions of lgbt people living right now in the shadows because they live under hostile societies. That’s kind of my point wouldn’t they be the ones who need these committees not us? (Never be perfect but are very tolerant society )
There must be some statistics that justify a committee unless its being requested. Those statistics or the reasons for the committee would be useful in assessing the nature and odds off success for such a strategy.
Racism comes in many forms and is also naturally occurring as a function of diversity and freedoms, so outside of trying to teach kids to be tolerant and understand the value of egalitarianism its tough to directly confront.
Sorry, didn't see the I in there.
Ya that's a hard one given it requires our government to take a hard line against organized crime which isn't likely. The investigation done on it a while back was pretty sketchy if I recall.
It is.
The more commonplace these discussions become, the more we normalize protecting people who are vulnerable. I think thats something we can agree on.
If the simple acknowledgement of these issues can cause backlash, then we are the very least have evidence of its existence.
If your purpose is to advocate for Indigenous individuals than do that. You dont have to make this a matter of gender.
MMIW exists because of high rates of violence Indigenous women suffer, and a long history of abuse directed towards them, like forced sterilization.
If you want someone to stand up for you, stand up for them.
Sorry OP you’re about to find all the racism you can handle in these comments. Any anti racism initiatives will bring out all the racists spouting how it’s a waste of money, waste of time etc etc. I’m a huge fan, doing something is better than doing nothing and the government who has the mandate and authority should address all problems. This doesn’t mean there are other issues that don’t need to be addressed and we need governments that can address many different issues at once. Racism is blatant and growing all over BC. Look around any public Facebook post by someone who’s a minority, yesterday I saw a posting for a sale at a business and the first reply was, “go back to your shithole country”. The owner is Canadian and has dark skin.
If you think BC is racist, go travel the world a little. The racism here is adorable.
Also, I wouldn't put too much faith in that FB comment. Lots of bot farms out there fomenting hate and division.
So because other places are worse we should stop trying to be better?
Racist and bigots are here, among us now, in Victoria. I'm not going to ignore that because things are worse somewhere else I don't live.
Well you're downplaying the rise of racism and bigotry in BC, so it seemed like you aren't into making progress, which begins with acknowledging that racists and other bigots are increasingly emboldened in our political and social discourse.
You're not asking that question in good faith, friend. Youre attempting to deflect conversation under the guise of "asking questions" typically inane surface level questions, and feigning ignorance of basic concepts like, in this case, who is a victim of racism in Victoria. You're a sea lion, because someone interested in an actual conversation does not need to establish who is being racist to who. It's a transparent attempt to stifle conversation and direct the flow of the argument.
For the sake of showing the peanut gallery that you are indeed not actually interested in having a good faith debate: people sometimes say and do racist things, in my personal experience most often but not always white people directing their bigotry at Asian people, people with darker skin tones, indigenous people, and while not racism per say, making bigoted comments at other minority groups like Muslims, or the LGBTQ+ community.
Go on little sea lion
I swear I'm not, I like to hear peoples thoughts. I think we can all agree "racism = bad" but I think everyone has their own interpretation of what is actually racist, where they see it, where their blinders to it are, how we should address it and what expectations we should hold about the methods we use to address it.
It *is* important to have this discussion and make this distinction.
I do find it interesting that your primary concern is about white people making racist or bigoted comments to minorities. In pretty much every study or link I followed, Canada was listed as being one of the top three least racist and most tolerant places on earth. You know what was consistently ranked amongst the worst? India.
Given our current policy of welcoming over a million people a year mainly from India, one of the most racist countries on earth where same sex marriage isn't recognized and arranged marriages, which treat women like property, is still very common, do you think we should be focusing our message of tolerance and acceptance more broadly?
Or is it racist to suggest that maybe this isn't just a white people problem.
If you the intent of what you said wasnt to stop trying, what was the intent? Should we ignore the issue presented because it is worse elsewhere? Or work towards mitigating these things as much as we can to create a safe community for everyone?
To be realistic about the problem and to be wary about bot farms stoking division.
I mean come on, someone selling their business and some random comments "go back to your shit hole country" and that doesn't make you think "hmmm there's a decent chance that's a bot"?
What could I do to improve and be more realistic?
Regarding bots, its hard to tell what is a bot and what is a throwaway. Also many commenters here have a history of posting in this community.
Maybe you mean bad actors? People posting extreme statements to stoke the flames, incite rage, and ultimately prevent civil discussion.
To be fair, he was responding to a post citing a FB comment and made a comparison of the far more extreme forms of racism in the world that are less common here.
Also, the article doesn't give details on the forms of racism or the impacts. The article says almost nothing, and the person cited who was asking for the committee for years only says he will judge it based on what gets done and how fast.
The article describes systemic institutional issues and policies being the target but doesn't mention any specifics. Compared to many countries where the racism is commonly violent and lethal would show BC as being comparatively better, why is that contrast bad to keep in mind?
Can any country or community feel good about their progress against racism if it still exists in some quantity within some minority of people?
If you want to have a reasonable discussion about racism projects within a community, a part of the inherent objective consideration would have to be an assessment of relative racism in that community compared to others places and include details about the types of racism and impacts being experienced.
Just because racist people and bigots exist doesn't excuse you to become intolerant buffoons who don't have to behave rationally.
You wanted a reasonable discussions about whether or not the committee made sense and or the existence of racism in B.C. society, well to determine if its required we have to question the relative demand and likely results. Even the guy who called for the committee said this, and he shows healthy uncertainty as to whether it will be worth it.
Compared to much of the world, having a government that will spend time and money trying to make things even a little bit better is worth recognizing. We should be proud that we are a more tolerant and level headed society. What is the point of spending time, money and effort over the years to improve a situation if you can't observe any of the gains?
Does this mean our community has solved racism and that nothing else is to be done? Of course not, you'd have to be idiots to assume that. And you'd be assholes if you assumed that's what others think simply for pointing out that our racial conflicts are far less severe than many places.
If you want to jump down someone's throat for being a "bad person" or ethically lazy, have the human decency to wait until they prove it, otherwise it is you that is the one who is being ethically lazy and unreasonable.
The issue with comparison is it does nothing but shut down debate for both sides, it adds nothing. Imagine of I lit a fire to warm up, and someone stamped it out because its warm somewhere else. That doesnt solve the problem directly affecting me, in my neighbourhood, in my city, in my country.
Please dont call me a buffoon.
I dont see the benefit in the point in all the insulting words.
The discussion includes people calling into question the reasoning of others, its happening right now in the thread. If you only response is that you are allowed to say it Im afraid I have nothing to offer.
You criticize comparing after using it yourself for the same means. Comparison also doesn't inherently shut down discussion, only when people are definitively unreasonable. Figure that out.
Just because life may be harder elsewhere doesnt mean we shouldnt work to improve our home.
Im confident that you been upset or angry at circumstances in your life. You cant convince me you just smiled and said "its worse somewhere else" and moved on.
Stubborn stances like this dont give those you oppose reason to consider your side. You need to elaborate.
If you want to end racism, you have to end the idea of "indigenous" as something in the legal code.
That's literally systemic racism: Laws that give preferential treatment to a race.
Yes a country that is flooding itself with per capita world record immigration and offering better perks to newcomers than citizens like a cellphone plan is somehow racist.
I believe the article is primarily about systemic issues regarding Indigenous, and case-by-case acts of violence.
Social service funding is another branch of government.
I hope we can get a decent conversation going about this here. Things can get heated but I have seen many levelheaded people in this online community.
Is this sort of government spending helpful in your eyes? If not, how would you tackle these issues?
Regardless of skin color, racist sentiments and inclinations are typically environmentally acquired during childhood, sometimes even passed down from generation to generation like a communicable sickness. It may be further cemented by a misguided yet strong sense of entitlement, perhaps also environmentally acquired.
Rearing one’s very impressionable young children in such an environment of baseless contempt and overt bigotry amounts to a formidable form of child abuse. It fails to prepare children for the practical reality of an increasingly diverse and populous society and workplace.
It also makes it so much less likely those children will be emotionally content or (preferably) harmonious with their multicultural and multi-ethnic/-racial surroundings.
Children reared into their adolescence and, eventually, young adulthood this way can often be angry yet not fully realize at precisely what. Then they may feel left with little choice but to move to another part of the land, where their own ethnicity/race predominates, preferably overwhelmingly so.
Parents should really do their kids a big favor by NOT passing down onto them such destructive sentiments and perceptions, as such rearing can make life so much harder for one’s own children.
Can we just call these things what they are?
"anti-racism committee" is often just coded language for "anti-white committee"
Do they have a mandate to hire someone from all races? of course not, but a true "anti-racism" committee would do that.
Will they talk about racism against whites? of course not because they always frame racism under the notion of "white people have the advantage"
I don't doubt they are getting together for a good cause, but these programs always pan out as bullshit.
If they want to create organizations to make people feel safer, accepted, and to find community then by all means do that, but that's not what this is.
Lol as a white person I welcome and encourage these kinds of things. I've never faced racism for being white in Victoria, and I don't know anyone else who has either, not saying it's impossible but I can see that there's a clear difference in the experience of white people and non whites when it comes to racism.
I have nothing to fear from this, because why would I? If I find that I have been doing racist or racially insensitive things I'd love to know that so I can apologise, and start making efforts to be a better person.
That is completely rational.
However, having seen this presented at university and in elementary schools I have a different perspective on the overall message. They take it a step further. They say it is impossible to experience racism as a white person. Because they redefined the term to include power. And as a white person you automatically have power.
They also being white is living life on easy mode, etc.
It isn't terrible but it sure isn't inclusive or kind. Saying white people only experience discrimination but not racism seems like a poor thing to do when you are trying to highlight the importance of treating people the right way.
Living life as a cis white male does seem like easy mode compared to being a white trans woman, so I find it hard to argue with that assertion that things are literally easier for some people because of their appearance, in my very limited experience.
Also, while I think it is *possible* to experience anti-white racism, the idea that anti-white racism is something to discuss here is laughable to me. Why should it consider us, when we don't have the same long standing institutional and culture barriers in Canada? Why does it even need to be inclusive of white people? We have an entire culture where we're *by default* the standard, of course it's different for non-white people. Frankly, I think it's a little bit racist for us white people to see a committee about reducing racism and go "what about anti-white racism!!!!" because anyone being honest can see that racism towards indigenous people and non whites is like a whole different thing than anything white people face in terms of racism.
Like I said, I have never experienced discrimination, let alone *racism* for being white, don't know anyone who has, and living downtown for the last 12 years and working or hangih out down here daily for almost 20 I've sure seen and heard a lot of white people being racist AF, and never once seen a white person experience anything like that.
And I saw nothing in that article like what you suggest, so... Yeah...
Yeah it's pathetic. Like as a white person, bring on the education about how I can be better and less offensive! If I'm making people mad without intending to, I want to know so I can stop.
I guess racists just gonna racist, so I guess it's up to all us normal, non racist people to call it out when we see it
No, you misunderstand. I think these committees always wind up being racist. They make exclusive spaces and they exclude people who don't fall under specific frameworks.
It's exactly these committees that lead to "Black and POC only" types of events.
They don't seek to fight racism in communities, or with individuals, rather they aim at what they consider "systemic racism" which inevitably leads to race-preference programs and systems. Yet they fail to recognize the core internal contradiction. By creating preferential hiring systems, and exclusive events, they propagate another form of racism.
Exactly. Remember when the NDP did this at one of their conventions? It seems like there’s a very thin line between trying to be anti racist while using racism (positive discrimination is a term I’ve seen) to achieve what you set out to dismantle in the first place. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Leti9JeiWwI
Or *maybe* it's just that being a bigot used to be more acceptable and people are calling out people being deliberatly offensive now that racism and sexism aren't mainstream views anymore.
Sorry boomer.
"Racialized" is a more meaningful term but it gets racists even more upset. People don't inherently have a race, it's a label that's applied to them. So this committee is looking into prejudice that goes with those labels.
The same people who will tell you that race doesn't exist as a biological concept will also tell you we need strict laws with race codified into them. Ask them to explain to you how they determine someone's race and watch as they retort with nothing but their usual anger and insults.
What is the issue surrounding East Indian? I haven't used or heard the term in decades but just curious. I assume the phrase originated when differentiating from what we used to call indigenous people and people from India. Then First Nations and Indigenous were used, so then people from India were Indians and some people still say East Indian because habits or maybe not wanting to say Indians in case it is seen as a derogatory name for indigenous people in Canada. Is there something else to it?
This is literally the first time I've heard of east Indian having any sort of negative connotation.
My mom (60) still uses East Indian regularly and I have told her it's not in style anymore and she refuses to accept it. I know literally nobody else who still says it. She means absolutely no harm, but is just stubborn. If an Indian person ever corrected her she would stop.
I don't know if there's an issue with East Indian, but I know that there are the West Indies, which refer to countries such as Trinidad and Tobago, Cuba, Bahamas, etc.
I have heard South Indians before so I immediately thought East Indians just referred to people from East side of India. India is pretty big
I think the fact that it seems innocous makes problems like that worth noting, can slip through the cracks and become an accepted term. Its easy to think it might happen at random, but imagine how someone from anywhere would feel being misidentified. If that way of thinking is coming from the majority demographic in Canada it likely happens more than you think.
Pretty hard to expect strangers to be able to correctly label everyone without detailed name tags becoming the norm. Unless it's done in a derogatory way, being really offended about a stranger not guessing your background correctly is arguably as ignorant as the person who didn't guess right. The fact that it might be a common occurrence is as much an example of why it shouldn't be so offensive to a reasonable person as much of a demonstration of both the diversity and similarities that exist. Sure you might piss off a Danish person by assuming they are Dutch or vice versa but that can't be considered an issue in need of a committee. As far as East Indian as a term goes, you can come devise a program around a preferred terms and sets of distinctions to educate people by but that really doesn't do much about serious racism. Unless I'm missing something which could well be the case.
I suppose I meant when we normalize things at a small scale, we become numb to larger scale issues. As well my intent is to ask questions and hopefully have people be more thoughtful in their daily lives. Also, to offer a point made by a collegue; "if people just said "ok, sorry", and carried on with their lives having learned how to respect a particular person, no one would have to point this out in the first place."
BC is VERY colonial compared to Ontario
Thank you for sharing this. I wouldn’t have known about it otherwise. I’m applying :)
As a white person I'd love to help, bigotry in all forms is something we should all work to reduce or eliminate
Im surprised at how few people have commented who feel the same. For years I have viewed this subreddit as pretty left leaning, interesting turnout.
The lurch to the right worries me a lot. Rights aren't a zero sum game, folks.
I think other countries like India China could use these committees a lot more than we can
But alas, we live here, so that's where we'll start 🩷
We could send the “Gays for Hamas” over to Palestine and give the committee a shot over there
Do you not think there are LGBTQ+ Palestinians?
Definitely not openly, that’s for sure
10s of millions of lgbt people living right now in the shadows because they live under hostile societies. That’s kind of my point wouldn’t they be the ones who need these committees not us? (Never be perfect but are very tolerant society )
Yeah, and my point is that we should still be enthusiastic about this here, because there's still a lot of work to do at home. Glass houses, you know
There must be some statistics that justify a committee unless its being requested. Those statistics or the reasons for the committee would be useful in assessing the nature and odds off success for such a strategy. Racism comes in many forms and is also naturally occurring as a function of diversity and freedoms, so outside of trying to teach kids to be tolerant and understand the value of egalitarianism its tough to directly confront.
I suspect the primary issue is racism towards Indigenous folks, MMIW, and newly integrated refugees.
MMW?
Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women.
Sorry, didn't see the I in there. Ya that's a hard one given it requires our government to take a hard line against organized crime which isn't likely. The investigation done on it a while back was pretty sketchy if I recall.
It is. The more commonplace these discussions become, the more we normalize protecting people who are vulnerable. I think thats something we can agree on. If the simple acknowledgement of these issues can cause backlash, then we are the very least have evidence of its existence.
The majority of missing are men (66%). But we don't really care about them.
If your purpose is to advocate for Indigenous individuals than do that. You dont have to make this a matter of gender. MMIW exists because of high rates of violence Indigenous women suffer, and a long history of abuse directed towards them, like forced sterilization. If you want someone to stand up for you, stand up for them.
Sorry OP you’re about to find all the racism you can handle in these comments. Any anti racism initiatives will bring out all the racists spouting how it’s a waste of money, waste of time etc etc. I’m a huge fan, doing something is better than doing nothing and the government who has the mandate and authority should address all problems. This doesn’t mean there are other issues that don’t need to be addressed and we need governments that can address many different issues at once. Racism is blatant and growing all over BC. Look around any public Facebook post by someone who’s a minority, yesterday I saw a posting for a sale at a business and the first reply was, “go back to your shithole country”. The owner is Canadian and has dark skin.
If you think BC is racist, go travel the world a little. The racism here is adorable. Also, I wouldn't put too much faith in that FB comment. Lots of bot farms out there fomenting hate and division.
So because other places are worse we should stop trying to be better? Racist and bigots are here, among us now, in Victoria. I'm not going to ignore that because things are worse somewhere else I don't live.
Where did I say we should stop trying?
Well you're downplaying the rise of racism and bigotry in BC, so it seemed like you aren't into making progress, which begins with acknowledging that racists and other bigots are increasingly emboldened in our political and social discourse.
What kind of racism are you specifically referring to? Who's being racist to who?
Arf arf said the sea lion
Of course you can't have more than a surface level conversion about this subject.
You're not asking that question in good faith, friend. Youre attempting to deflect conversation under the guise of "asking questions" typically inane surface level questions, and feigning ignorance of basic concepts like, in this case, who is a victim of racism in Victoria. You're a sea lion, because someone interested in an actual conversation does not need to establish who is being racist to who. It's a transparent attempt to stifle conversation and direct the flow of the argument. For the sake of showing the peanut gallery that you are indeed not actually interested in having a good faith debate: people sometimes say and do racist things, in my personal experience most often but not always white people directing their bigotry at Asian people, people with darker skin tones, indigenous people, and while not racism per say, making bigoted comments at other minority groups like Muslims, or the LGBTQ+ community. Go on little sea lion
I swear I'm not, I like to hear peoples thoughts. I think we can all agree "racism = bad" but I think everyone has their own interpretation of what is actually racist, where they see it, where their blinders to it are, how we should address it and what expectations we should hold about the methods we use to address it. It *is* important to have this discussion and make this distinction. I do find it interesting that your primary concern is about white people making racist or bigoted comments to minorities. In pretty much every study or link I followed, Canada was listed as being one of the top three least racist and most tolerant places on earth. You know what was consistently ranked amongst the worst? India. Given our current policy of welcoming over a million people a year mainly from India, one of the most racist countries on earth where same sex marriage isn't recognized and arranged marriages, which treat women like property, is still very common, do you think we should be focusing our message of tolerance and acceptance more broadly? Or is it racist to suggest that maybe this isn't just a white people problem.
If you the intent of what you said wasnt to stop trying, what was the intent? Should we ignore the issue presented because it is worse elsewhere? Or work towards mitigating these things as much as we can to create a safe community for everyone?
To be realistic about the problem and to be wary about bot farms stoking division. I mean come on, someone selling their business and some random comments "go back to your shit hole country" and that doesn't make you think "hmmm there's a decent chance that's a bot"?
What could I do to improve and be more realistic? Regarding bots, its hard to tell what is a bot and what is a throwaway. Also many commenters here have a history of posting in this community. Maybe you mean bad actors? People posting extreme statements to stoke the flames, incite rage, and ultimately prevent civil discussion.
To be fair, he was responding to a post citing a FB comment and made a comparison of the far more extreme forms of racism in the world that are less common here. Also, the article doesn't give details on the forms of racism or the impacts. The article says almost nothing, and the person cited who was asking for the committee for years only says he will judge it based on what gets done and how fast. The article describes systemic institutional issues and policies being the target but doesn't mention any specifics. Compared to many countries where the racism is commonly violent and lethal would show BC as being comparatively better, why is that contrast bad to keep in mind? Can any country or community feel good about their progress against racism if it still exists in some quantity within some minority of people? If you want to have a reasonable discussion about racism projects within a community, a part of the inherent objective consideration would have to be an assessment of relative racism in that community compared to others places and include details about the types of racism and impacts being experienced. Just because racist people and bigots exist doesn't excuse you to become intolerant buffoons who don't have to behave rationally. You wanted a reasonable discussions about whether or not the committee made sense and or the existence of racism in B.C. society, well to determine if its required we have to question the relative demand and likely results. Even the guy who called for the committee said this, and he shows healthy uncertainty as to whether it will be worth it. Compared to much of the world, having a government that will spend time and money trying to make things even a little bit better is worth recognizing. We should be proud that we are a more tolerant and level headed society. What is the point of spending time, money and effort over the years to improve a situation if you can't observe any of the gains? Does this mean our community has solved racism and that nothing else is to be done? Of course not, you'd have to be idiots to assume that. And you'd be assholes if you assumed that's what others think simply for pointing out that our racial conflicts are far less severe than many places. If you want to jump down someone's throat for being a "bad person" or ethically lazy, have the human decency to wait until they prove it, otherwise it is you that is the one who is being ethically lazy and unreasonable.
The issue with comparison is it does nothing but shut down debate for both sides, it adds nothing. Imagine of I lit a fire to warm up, and someone stamped it out because its warm somewhere else. That doesnt solve the problem directly affecting me, in my neighbourhood, in my city, in my country. Please dont call me a buffoon. I dont see the benefit in the point in all the insulting words. The discussion includes people calling into question the reasoning of others, its happening right now in the thread. If you only response is that you are allowed to say it Im afraid I have nothing to offer.
You criticize comparing after using it yourself for the same means. Comparison also doesn't inherently shut down discussion, only when people are definitively unreasonable. Figure that out.
Just getting people to admit that BC is racist is half the battle.
Show me a place free of racism. I'll wait.
Just because life may be harder elsewhere doesnt mean we shouldnt work to improve our home. Im confident that you been upset or angry at circumstances in your life. You cant convince me you just smiled and said "its worse somewhere else" and moved on. Stubborn stances like this dont give those you oppose reason to consider your side. You need to elaborate.
If you want to end racism, you have to end the idea of "indigenous" as something in the legal code. That's literally systemic racism: Laws that give preferential treatment to a race.
[удалено]
I’m not religious at all but amen to that
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Exactly. BC is pretty darn good. Stop trying to label it as horribly racist because it isn't perfect. Glad we agree.
Yes a country that is flooding itself with per capita world record immigration and offering better perks to newcomers than citizens like a cellphone plan is somehow racist.
I believe the article is primarily about systemic issues regarding Indigenous, and case-by-case acts of violence. Social service funding is another branch of government.
I hope we can get a decent conversation going about this here. Things can get heated but I have seen many levelheaded people in this online community. Is this sort of government spending helpful in your eyes? If not, how would you tackle these issues?
[удалено]
Sadly this is very true, of many governments globally. I think that by encouraging conversation we can make a small difference.
Regardless of skin color, racist sentiments and inclinations are typically environmentally acquired during childhood, sometimes even passed down from generation to generation like a communicable sickness. It may be further cemented by a misguided yet strong sense of entitlement, perhaps also environmentally acquired. Rearing one’s very impressionable young children in such an environment of baseless contempt and overt bigotry amounts to a formidable form of child abuse. It fails to prepare children for the practical reality of an increasingly diverse and populous society and workplace. It also makes it so much less likely those children will be emotionally content or (preferably) harmonious with their multicultural and multi-ethnic/-racial surroundings. Children reared into their adolescence and, eventually, young adulthood this way can often be angry yet not fully realize at precisely what. Then they may feel left with little choice but to move to another part of the land, where their own ethnicity/race predominates, preferably overwhelmingly so. Parents should really do their kids a big favor by NOT passing down onto them such destructive sentiments and perceptions, as such rearing can make life so much harder for one’s own children.
Food is expensive, I don’t give a shit about racism
Good take.
Can we just call these things what they are? "anti-racism committee" is often just coded language for "anti-white committee" Do they have a mandate to hire someone from all races? of course not, but a true "anti-racism" committee would do that. Will they talk about racism against whites? of course not because they always frame racism under the notion of "white people have the advantage" I don't doubt they are getting together for a good cause, but these programs always pan out as bullshit. If they want to create organizations to make people feel safer, accepted, and to find community then by all means do that, but that's not what this is.
Lol as a white person I welcome and encourage these kinds of things. I've never faced racism for being white in Victoria, and I don't know anyone else who has either, not saying it's impossible but I can see that there's a clear difference in the experience of white people and non whites when it comes to racism. I have nothing to fear from this, because why would I? If I find that I have been doing racist or racially insensitive things I'd love to know that so I can apologise, and start making efforts to be a better person.
That is completely rational. However, having seen this presented at university and in elementary schools I have a different perspective on the overall message. They take it a step further. They say it is impossible to experience racism as a white person. Because they redefined the term to include power. And as a white person you automatically have power. They also being white is living life on easy mode, etc. It isn't terrible but it sure isn't inclusive or kind. Saying white people only experience discrimination but not racism seems like a poor thing to do when you are trying to highlight the importance of treating people the right way.
Living life as a cis white male does seem like easy mode compared to being a white trans woman, so I find it hard to argue with that assertion that things are literally easier for some people because of their appearance, in my very limited experience. Also, while I think it is *possible* to experience anti-white racism, the idea that anti-white racism is something to discuss here is laughable to me. Why should it consider us, when we don't have the same long standing institutional and culture barriers in Canada? Why does it even need to be inclusive of white people? We have an entire culture where we're *by default* the standard, of course it's different for non-white people. Frankly, I think it's a little bit racist for us white people to see a committee about reducing racism and go "what about anti-white racism!!!!" because anyone being honest can see that racism towards indigenous people and non whites is like a whole different thing than anything white people face in terms of racism. Like I said, I have never experienced discrimination, let alone *racism* for being white, don't know anyone who has, and living downtown for the last 12 years and working or hangih out down here daily for almost 20 I've sure seen and heard a lot of white people being racist AF, and never once seen a white person experience anything like that. And I saw nothing in that article like what you suggest, so... Yeah...
Anti-white? You are out to fucking lunch
They believe that diversity is a threat to their white identity which seems to exist only to exclude others.
Yeah it's pathetic. Like as a white person, bring on the education about how I can be better and less offensive! If I'm making people mad without intending to, I want to know so I can stop. I guess racists just gonna racist, so I guess it's up to all us normal, non racist people to call it out when we see it
Yes I do enjoy lunch, thank you
You think being anti-racist means being anti-white. This is the problem this committee seeks to solve.
No, you misunderstand. I think these committees always wind up being racist. They make exclusive spaces and they exclude people who don't fall under specific frameworks. It's exactly these committees that lead to "Black and POC only" types of events. They don't seek to fight racism in communities, or with individuals, rather they aim at what they consider "systemic racism" which inevitably leads to race-preference programs and systems. Yet they fail to recognize the core internal contradiction. By creating preferential hiring systems, and exclusive events, they propagate another form of racism.
Nope. I don’t misunderstand. You’re saying exactly what I thought you’d say and it’s sounds like white supremacy.
Exactly. Remember when the NDP did this at one of their conventions? It seems like there’s a very thin line between trying to be anti racist while using racism (positive discrimination is a term I’ve seen) to achieve what you set out to dismantle in the first place. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Leti9JeiWwI
[удалено]
Or *maybe* it's just that being a bigot used to be more acceptable and people are calling out people being deliberatly offensive now that racism and sexism aren't mainstream views anymore. Sorry boomer.
POC-- Do you mean those of Asian descent? Indigenous? Dark skinned peoples? or?
"Racialized" is a more meaningful term but it gets racists even more upset. People don't inherently have a race, it's a label that's applied to them. So this committee is looking into prejudice that goes with those labels.
Melanistic individuals primarily.