Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Do you agree with affirmative action?  

10 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

With all of the accusations of systemic racism, including the idea of unconscious bias, some companies are implementing affirmative action hiring policies that will aim to hire more minorities.  The CBC, for example, claims it will make sure at least 50% of its workforce are minorities.  Do you agree with affirmative action policies?

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Employment equity" (and Employment Equity Act for federal hiring) is the context term for Canada, which specifically rejected the American term "affirmative action" because of the existing baggage associated with such language (1980's).

Either way, the practice is discriminatory.

 

Edited by bush_cheney2004
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

"Employment equity" (and Employment Equity Act for federal hiring) is the context term for Canada, which specifically rejected the American term "affirmative action" because of the existing baggage associated with such language (1980's).

Either way, the practice is discriminatory.

 

Yes, equity is the new manifestation.  I’ve wondered whether it’s possible to have completely blind interviewing, such that employers aren’t allowed to see names or know the race or gender of applicants, and interviews would be blind with computer-modified voices, but I’m quite sure that most interviewers would insist on meeting the applicant to get a sense of grooming and confident body language, for example.

We actually seem to be moving in the opposite direction of providing racial data on a range of practices, such as discipline, incarceration, educational outcomes, income levels, executive positions, etc.  Such data is used to inform system policies.  I can see how such data can be important to preventing unfair practices, but I also wonder if it makes race a focus of organizational practices when race shouldn’t come into decision-making at all.

We seem to fall into the trap of believing we can score victimhood based on a single metric, such as race, when of course we know there are privileged black people and underprivileged white people, for example.  Or we try to add up multiple intersectionalities, such as poverty, marginalization due to homosexuality, minority status, etc., as though victimhood can be quantified.  Do such practices reinforce a victim culture wherein we compete at illustrating how hard done by we are?  Is that really something we can assess when everyone is different and some people come from humble beginnings to achieve great success while others who are given every opportunity fail miserably?

Is there a middle ground that seeks equality, perhaps raising opportunities for those who are genuinely hard done by, and not only based on race, without creating new forms of bias and unfairness?   

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

With all of the accusations of systemic racism, including the idea of unconscious bias, some companies are implementing affirmative action hiring policies that will aim to hire more minorities.  The CBC, for example, claims it will make sure at least 50% of its workforce are minorities.  Do you agree with affirmative action policies?

50% of the CBC 'work' force is deadwood. Taxpayer funded, bought and paid for, pandering to the equally deadwood Liberal government.  50% minorities is another socialist tool . . . how about competition for the job with others who are as qualified?  Who cares if you're a so-called minority . . . if you can do the work better than others - - - the job's yours.  This country is so pussified it's sickening.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Yes, equity is the new manifestation.  I’ve wondered whether it’s possible to have completely blind interviewing, such that employers aren’t allowed to see names or know the race or gender of applicants, and interviews would be blind with computer-modified voices, but I’m quite sure that most interviewers would insist on meeting the applicant to get a sense of grooming and confident body language, for example.

 

Blind hiring practices are now virtually impossible, as employers and teams want to know far more information about candidates, including social media posts, group affiliations, credit history, illegal drug use, criminal record, etc.  

 

Quote

We actually seem to be moving in the opposite direction of providing racial data on a range of practices, such as discipline, incarceration, educational outcomes, income levels, executive positions, etc.  Such data is used to inform system policies.  I can see how such data can be important to preventing unfair practices, but I also wonder if it makes race a focus of organizational practices when race shouldn’t come into decision-making at all.

 

Canada has overtly avoided race based data as a matter of policy for many years.   This leaves a big hole in demographic data and analysis in many different areas.    Pointing at U.S. data is a common but very imperfect crutch.

 

Quote

... Do such practices reinforce a victim culture wherein we compete at illustrating how hard done by we are?  Is that really something we can assess when everyone is different and some people come from humble beginnings to achieve great success while others who are given every opportunity fail miserably?

Is there a middle ground that seeks equality, perhaps raising opportunities for those who are genuinely hard done by, and not only based on race, without creating new forms of bias and unfairness?   

 

Not right now...the progressive mob demands that race based hiring and opportunity get more support.    Equity in opportunity, not outcomes has become passe.   Political and social pressure will impose their will for more distorted and unfair outcomes.   Demands for so called "guaranteed income" will grow.

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not going to stop at just having 50 % of the work force to be of some sort of color, it is going to spread all through out the company or department chain of command....you don't need to be fully qualified ,to raise to the top today just the right color, right sex, right religion, and in most government departments it is this way already.. look at the recruiting ads, or government job descriptions…. How can discriminations be ok if we just reverse it.. This is not the path to equality, its just more of the same shit we already have,  except the colors are changing....

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

With all of the accusations of systemic racism, including the idea of unconscious bias, some companies are implementing affirmative action hiring policies that will aim to hire more minorities.  The CBC, for example, claims it will make sure at least 50% of its workforce are minorities.  Do you agree with affirmative action policies?

The idea behind affirmative action in the US was to make up for centuries of discrimination. The Jim Crowe laws existed right into the 1940s so bringing in affirmative action was supposed to help make up for the lack of financial opportunities blacks had had.

According to Stats Canada, More than 68.8% of Canadian visible minority population are foreign-born, 27.7% are children of immigrants. Less than 4% are third-generation or beyond. Less than 3,000 Canadians are third-generation and visible minority and over 75 years old, they are mainly Black Nova Scotians.

So Canada has nothing to make up for, at least not for visible minority members. You could make an opportunity with regard to indigenous people, perhaps, but that's not the argument being made here.

If visible minority members are poor in greater numbers than other Canadians, and have lacked economic opportunities, the responsibility for that lies in a poor immigration system, not in any sort of 'systemic racism' towards them.

As for the CBC, there are almost no white males in front of a camera in its news shows, and I doubt there are an awful lot behind the scenes either. It is a racist organization filled with ideologues of the far left.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Census Profile, 2016 Census". Statistics Canada

72.9% over Canadian pop is European/White vs 22.3 Visible Minority.  The statistics show some groups are systematically and systemically not treated fairly under various "conditions/test".  The protest is to change "ideas Canada has nothing to make up for, at least not for visible minority members". 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Similar Content

    • By Zeitgeist
      https://www.mississauga.com/news-story/10017802-online-petition-calls-for-renaming-of-winston-churchill-boulevard-in-mississauga/
       
      So, the first leader to declare war on Hitler and Nazism is under fire with calls to change the name of Sir Winston Churchill Blvd. Thoughts?
    • By Hussain
      I had the privilege of interviewing MP Mark Holland on issues facing Canada from Clean drinking water in Indengoues reserves, Coronavirus outbreak, Affordable housing, and Wexit Canada.
      You can watch it on youtube Monday 2:15 p.m EST 
      BUT What do you think are the top 5 issues in Canada?
      Follow me on IG @t.w.t_podcast_
       
    • By Scott Mayers
      A news conference was just held now on the news of Indigenous people declaring war on us all for the "not guilty" verdict of Gerald Stanley. See  http://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-news/gerald-stanley-trial-jury-delivers-not-guilty-verdict-in-murder-of-colten-boushie
      and present news coverage tonight (10:45 Global news and likely on CBC network now). 
      I've always understood our government's stance of "Mutliculturalism" (TM) to represent collective forms of National Socialists and NOT diversity of all peoples. In the need for the establishment of this country's faltering power to preserve their own Nationalistic 'catholic' origins here, Pierre Trudeau set up a Constitution that locked in his favored religion and culture but had to include token means to the very Aboriginal tribes his (not my) relatives thought of the Natives when they abused them through various policies of their own ancestors. 
      I believe the means of 'favoring' the Aboriginals the WAY we have in this country today goes along with the similar movements to grant women and girls retribution against the problems ...that again....his own kind of family and thinkers created. Yet to do so means to TRANSFER the burden to all people and especially to those very stereotypical thinking memes against SCAPEGOATS of the whole rather than take on the burden of debt that is due against the churches and wealthy establishment of the Eastern Canadian Catholic and Anglican 'loyalists' that served to go against the democratic changes of the Enlightenment when the U.S. was being formed. 
      My anger here is to what this conference of "Nations" (Aboriginal Nationalists) are challenging of many across the nation now against the trial that "let a guilty man free" today. [I don't hold any opinion for Gerald Stanley's guilt nor innocence, only the FACT that he's been tried by a jury of his peers as we are all expected a right here to.] The rise of Nationalism by the Natives now is something that I fear is going to harm us all in kind to all the other segregate empowered groups being fostered by Mutliculturalism. [Remember, the Nazis in Germany is precisely a motion of "Indigenous" Germans demanding SEGREGATE social rights as 'distinct' special peoples!.]
      History is not only repeating itself,...it is getting amplified for the sake of the selfish arrogance and ignorance of those supporting SEGREGATE laws for SPECIFIC people as though they are above and beyond reproach. 
      I was born on this EARTH and so am equally "Aboriginal" here. I also have NOT gained any of the wealth nor benefits of anyone here, including no favor to high paying jobs that I get stereotyped as having gained from. I am a "FLOATER" when it comes to the fact that I don't own shit nor any privileged "culture" that I supposedly OWN from some ancestors of mine. This is MY land as much as any others here. And I'm getting tired of this EMPOWERMENT to National Socialism in the name of "liberalism" of a left that is actually the collective right-wingers AVENGING W.A.S.P.s that I also DO NOT SUPPORT!!
      Thank you Trudeau and all you who support SEGREGATIONIST, racist and sexist laws here. Thank you for the inevitable wars that YOU are actually fostering of the very people you claim to be pitying. 
       
      P.S. "Person Kind" comes from the meaning "per son" (for each SON); So if you were intending to evade any sexist overtones of the word "Mankind" you think it has, Justine, think again. [This is a dig to his comment the other day correcting some girl who used this.]
    • By drummindiver
      The author of this article states this succinctly,   and I agree.  These books hilight the evils of racism,  and banning them due to their use of racial slurs is counter productive. 
      ANY thoughts?
      http://www.dailywire.com/news/11275/leftists-virginia-ban-kill-mockingbird-huck-finn-ben-shapiro
    • By Moonlight Graham
      I thought this was a pretty Interesting and pretty frank way to view at "race relations" between black and whites in the USA from comedian Chris Rock. From an interview a bit more than a year ago:

      http://www.vox.com/xpress/2014/12/1/7313467/chris-rock-interview
      Not a typical way "race relations" are thought as. Pretty damning to white Americans in history, and mostly true IMO. Do you think his statements are accurate? Not?
  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...