The Shotgun Blog
Friday, July 23, 2010
Affirmative Action is Racist
The government has announced a review of affirmative action in the Canadian government’s hiring practice. Minister Stockwell Day implies that hiring someone on the basis of their ethnic background is racist. This is one of the rare occasions when I can completely agree with Mr. Day. Affirmative action is fundamentally racist.
Unsurprisingly NDP MP Pat Martin disagrees. He seems to think that discriminatory practises are somehow not discriminatory:
“I don't think they can make a case that white, middle-class people are being denied access to public service jobs, or that there's any preference shown.”
I not only think that such a case can be made, I think that making it would be extremely simple. To do so I will use an example that has been recently provided by Blogging Tory Sara Landriault.
Ms. Landriault posted the requirements of a job for a position in the Federal government:
Applicants must meet at least the first requirement:
* Open to: Members of the following Employment Equity groups: Aboriginal persons, visible minorities
* Persons residing in Canada and Canadian citizens residing abroad.
It then went on to define what a ‘visible minority’ is:
A person in a visible minority group is someone (other than an Aboriginal person as defined above) who is non-white in colour/race, regardless of place of birth. The visible minority group includes: Black, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, South Asian-East Indian (including Indian from India; Bangladeshi; Pakistani; East Indian from Guyana, Trinidad, East Africa; etc.), Southeast Asian (including Burmese; Cambodian; Laotian; Thai; Vietnamese; etc.) non-white West Asian, North African or Arab (including Egyptian; Libyan; Lebanese; etc.), non-white Latin American (including indigenous persons from Central and South America, etc.), person of mixed origin (with one parent in one of the visible minority groups listed above), other visible minority group.
This is a government job that is open to anyone except for someone of a particular ethnic background. Just because it doesn’t explicitly say “no whites need apply” doesn’t mean that this isn’t what the government is saying.
So Mr. Martin please explain to me how exactly white people aren’t being denied access to public service jobs?
Posted by Hugh MacIntyre on July 23, 2010 | Permalink
He can't explain it without sounding like a fool. There is simple no way to justify it. I have heard people try based on the perceived past sins of white people. This I find strange. The very people who are apparently victims of racism are willing to practice the same racism.
So we should fully expect futire affirmative action that legislates white people must be hired in order to make up for the sins of today?
Posted by: TM | 2010-07-23 9:14:14 AM
I recommend I be sent to an internment camp for agreeing with this piece.
Posted by: Blazingcatfur | 2010-07-23 9:16:44 AM
Of course affirmative action (often now called employment equity within the federal civil service) is racist along with sexist. As long as the government plays identity politics it will not change. How about ensuring that the best qualified person get the job regardless of colour, sex or whatever identity?
Posted by: Alain | 2010-07-23 10:54:21 AM
Racism of the "progressives" is much more encompassing than affirmative action. There is the racism of lowered expectations such as ignoring the killing fields of Cambodia, Somalia, Darfur, the Congo, or the exploits of Robert Mugabe while attacking "white" regimes for any perceived injustice (like Israel, because "they should know better and we expect a higher standard"). There is also the pursuit of ethnic voting blocks, apparently an acceptable form of racial profiling hiding behind nicer sounding names like multiculturalism or comprehensive immigration reform. And finally, there's the hypocritical tolerance for purely racist organizations (and even racist rap culture - N word acceptance) such as the NAACP, or the Black Panthers, considering the potential outrage from "progressives" if there were equivalent "white racist" organizations given the same main stream acceptance.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2010-07-23 10:56:32 AM
John, excellent points! There are also Women's shows, black music awards, etc. If you were to replace the word women or black with "white male" in these, the media would be in an uproar.
Imagine White Male Business Awards. White Music Awards, White Pride Day...
Posted by: TM | 2010-07-23 11:21:14 AM
Haven't you caught on yet folks? It is all a big game, we are being conned!
Vote Left get Bull = Vote Right get Bull
This is why we need a new party for Canadian citizens, not for Corporations!
TWO Party System News clip:
Posted by: M Btok | 2010-07-23 2:33:06 PM
The only way Pat Martin's comments can be cajoled into making sense is if you take them in the aggregate — i.e. white people as a whole aren't systematically underrepresented in the civil service, therefore nothing is wrong.
In other words, individuals who miss out on a job opportunity don't matter. Only the overall result for the whole group is important. A perfect example of the collectivist mind in action.
Posted by: Bradley | 2010-07-23 2:34:42 PM
The looney left like to coach opposition to AA as racism. Watch the movie American History X and the proposition is that anyone who opposes race based hiring ends up being a neo-Nazi
Posted by: Faramir | 2010-07-23 9:11:26 PM
Yet in the aggregate, Bradley, some professions are still almost completely dominated by women. Yet I don’t often hear the women in those professions saying they need to recruit more men.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2010-07-24 9:50:38 AM
Thats right Shane--
publishing dominated by women
so is the clothing industry
and middle management
- thats the smart jobs
and from i can tell-
certain lesser smart jobs
are dominated by women
retails sales clerks
restaurant and food services
value added home economics
basically, the traditional
female roles worldwide
through the centuries
with fresh labels
there will never be real equality
between the genders
until there are... garbage women
Posted by: 419 | 2010-07-24 12:48:54 PM
Forced equality is state sponsored inequality. It's impossible to be anything else no matter how badly some want it to be.
Posted by: TM | 2010-07-24 1:19:15 PM
The Canadian Nazi Party, the Human Rights Act and Employment Equity; all gifts from you know who.
"“the Canadian Jewish community has a rich history of involvement and advocacy on constitutional issues particularly the protection of minority rights.”
We have been at the forefront of human rights and multi-culturism advocacy; together, we have left not one serious expression of anti-Jewish, anti-Muslim, or other religion, ethnic or race based hate go unchallenged-whether white supremacist, neo Nazi, or holocaust revisionist in nature. (aka the Anglo-Saxon founders of Canada)
This is our collective inheritance and like good stewardship of any valuable inheritance, it should be acknowledged, treasured and enlarged."
Now we discover that this treasured heritage is racist, well knock me over with a feather.
Posted by: DJ | 2010-07-25 1:20:58 AM
I was recently shut out of an important (for my career) job with the federal civil service because it was only open to everyone except white males. It really really sucked. I ended up depressed for a number of months.
I hope my kids won't have to deal with this when they grow up.
Posted by: shane | 2010-08-03 2:01:57 PM
The government has yet to learn what every mother of a large family learned decades ago. "If you do not treat all your children the same, you will pay the price as they get older". Racism is a double edged sword and mandated racism towards whites will backfire eventually. The social engineers seem to have everything except common sense. Pity.
Posted by: peterj | 2010-08-04 12:52:25 AM
A lack of common sense is a sure sign that someone has been educated beyond their intelligence, Peter.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2010-08-04 6:33:59 AM
15 posts and we all agree. Very rare indeed.
Posted by: peterj | 2010-08-07 9:23:45 AM
I do not agree. I think the 15 posts wish it were 1961.
Look to where the money or power is. The boards of Corporations our MPs the senate the judicial system. Who is represented there?
To say race of the invading nations did not have a bearing on who was employed in the past is an all out lie. If humanity as a whole did not play favorites the laws of equity would not be required.
Posted by: EC | 2010-08-14 4:21:22 PM
Great. Soon I'll have one less excuse for being unemployed. At this rate, it won't be long before demonstrated ability to read and write beyond a grade five level is required for slacker-friendly government postings.
Posted by: Blake | 2010-09-01 1:40:41 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.