BBC Discrimination Against White People?

[Braecland]

No. I am speaking of equality of opportunity. Minorities are at a distinct disadvantage in white Western society, and programs like this help even the playing field.

The problem is that it's been shown that if admissions officers/recruiters/employers received two applications identical in everything but name - one a common white American name, the other a common black American name - the white person's application will pretty much always win out.

I'm not saying this is deliberate at all. Not in all or even most cases. Racial prejudice and cultural stereotypes are deeply ingrained in us from early childhood, to the degree that we aren't even conscious of them affecting our thought process without concerted introspection, deliberately evaluating your own reactions and behaviors in certain situations.

Which is why I think that businesses ought to look exclusively at credentials and skill when weighing the merits of a prospective employee's application.

A voice of reason, I was beginning to lose hope in NS once more.

[Wallenburg]

Which is why I think that businesses ought to look exclusively at credentials and skill when weighing the merits of a prospective employee's application.

A voice of reason, I was beginning to lose hope in NS once more.

I support Bernie Sanders.

[HMS Vanguard]

So, you like equality of outcome?

No. I am speaking of equality of opportunity. Minorities are at a distinct disadvantage in white Western society, and programs like this help even the playing field.

Don't get me wrong, I think that programs to help poor or struggling individuals, but a program being dominated by whites isn't necessarily a bad thing. If they earn what they get, I'm fine with it. I'm just trying to find where you're arguing from.

The problem is that it's been shown that if admissions officers/recruiters/employers received two applications identical in everything but name - one a common white American name, the other a common black American name - the white person's application will pretty much always win out.

I'm not saying this is deliberate at all. Not in all or even most cases. Racial prejudice and cultural stereotypes are deeply ingrained in us from early childhood, to the degree that we aren't even conscious of them affecting our thought process without concerted introspection, deliberately evaluating your own reactions and behaviors in certain situations.

The free market is a natural experiment measuring productivity. If this filtering does not represent selection for actual superior productivity, companies that do it tend to go out of business. Therefore it should be small or non-existent. Discrimination as an explanation for income and employment gap simply does not make sense in a market economy.

The most parsimonious explanation for the US's racial caste system is underlying productivity differences, with the most to least productive races being: asian, white, mestizo [Hispanic], black.

Note that the least productive non-white race is the one that has been in the US longest, has the highest integrated historical income and wealth, and the most political power.

[Tahar Joblis]

"Non-white ethnic minority" opens up two cans of worms.

First, "non-white" is a racial status, not an ethnic status.

Second, what is defined as "white" becomes very tricky. It's not exactly a universal historical and geographic constant.

The problem is that it's been shown that if admissions officers/recruiters/employers received two applications identical in everything but name - one a common white American name, the other a common black American name - the white person's application will pretty much always win out.

Employers and recruiters, generally. Admissions officers, generally not. College admissions officers have in general been working to diversify campuses, which means that to the degree that they have discretion, they are discriminating against Asian applicants and in favor of black and Latino applicants.

When that discretion is removed, and college admissions officers are not permitted the opportunity to discriminate based on race, the student population becomes substantially less black, less Latino, and substantially more Asian, because those students are doing (respectively) worse / better in high school.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Nope. Modern society sprang from that of our forefathers. Our parents raised us and imbued in our generation many of their own prejudices and tendencies and suppositions, just as theirs did to them, and so on and so forth. The institutions we perpetuate today were founded by our forefathers. They gave them their own standards, traditions, and systems, and set for them directions and purposes attuned to their worldview.

We can't just pretend our predecessors didn't exist, or that the negative aspects of their personalities and culture haven't affected us.

Behold, social justice's version of original sin. And people say it isn't a religious cult. Remember people, it's not enough to be anti-racist, you have to actively dismantle white privilege by segregating and discriminating based on arbitrary features like skin colour and ethnicity.

What the fuck are you even talking about? Seriously? Do you genuinely believe time moves in separated blocks, having no affect on one another and being entirely unrelated? Do you deny that, on average, racist parents are likely to raise children with ingrained racial prejudice, because of the behavior and statements of the most influential figures in their lives? Do you truly believe that a society based on, say, the institution of slavery, can have that institution abolished with no ripples in the cultural-timeline-pond?

Like holy fucking shit, you're just going off the goddamn deep end with the ridiculous strawman of a radically-misconstrued interpretation of my post you're providing here. You're just rambling. Not even trying to form some sort of intellectual grasp on the issue. Get over yourself, no one's impressed.

[New Grestin]

If they're deliberately closing the position to White people, then yes, it is discrimination.

Seems pretty cut and dry, old bean.

[Frenline Delpha]

Behold, social justice's version of original sin. And people say it isn't a religious cult. Remember people, it's not enough to be anti-racist, you have to actively dismantle white privilege by segregating and discriminating based on arbitrary features like skin colour and ethnicity.

What the fuck are you even talking about? Seriously? Do you genuinely believe time moves in separated blocks, having no affect on one another and being entirely unrelated? Do you deny that, on average, racist parents are likely to raise children with ingrained racial prejudice, because of the behavior and statements of the most influential figures in their lives? Do you truly believe that a society based on, say, the institution of slavery, can have that institution abolished with no ripples in the cultural-timeline-pond?

Like holy fucking shit, you're just going off the goddamn deep end with the ridiculous strawman of a radically-misconstrued interpretation of my post you're providing here. You're just rambling. Not even trying to form some sort of intellectual grasp on the issue. Get over yourself, no one's impressed.

Not all of America was part of the south. Sure, the north had slaves, but our economy wasn't dependant on them.

[Tahar Joblis]

No. I am speaking of equality of opportunity. Minorities are at a distinct disadvantage in white Western society, and programs like this help even the playing field.

The problem is that it's been shown that if admissions officers/recruiters/employers received two applications identical in everything but name - one a common white American name, the other a common black American name - the white person's application will pretty much always win out.

I'm not saying this is deliberate at all. Not in all or even most cases. Racial prejudice and cultural stereotypes are deeply ingrained in us from early childhood, to the degree that we aren't even conscious of them affecting our thought process without concerted introspection, deliberately evaluating your own reactions and behaviors in certain situations.

The free market is a natural experiment measuring productivity. If this filtering does not represent selection for actual superior productivity, companies that do it tend to go out of business. Therefore it should be small or non-existent. Discrimination as an explanation for income and employment gap simply does not make sense in a market economy.

It does if it serves as a proxy for factors that are more difficult to measure but not necessarily intrinsic to race, produced by discrimination. It also does if the disadvantage created by overlooking potentially underpriced quality employees is small, which is the case if we're talking about a relatively small minority of the population.

For example, the primary and secondary school systems are not really subject to market forces in a significant way. The heavier-handed forms of disciplinary action within the primary and secondary school systems are applied unevenly based on race and sex, and actively inhibit success within the educational system, both in terms of graduation, in terms of actual learning, and in terms of the construction of social support networks.

The most parsimonious explanation for the US's racial caste system is underlying productivity differences, with the most to least productive races being: asian, white, mestizo [Hispanic], black.

And yet white man / asian woman couples have higher household incomes than dual asian couples.

Note that the least productive non-white race is the one that has been in the US longest, has the highest integrated historical income and wealth, and the most political power.

I don't know what you mean by "historical income and wealth," but black wealth and income have historically been quite low, and in the many of the few cases that a black middle class developed early on in the US (e.g., Wilmington in the late 19th century, Tulsa in the early 20th century) it has been subsequently burned out in riots.

When it comes to families resident within the same polity, it takes on the order of 10 generations for a significant advantage to be washed out. Compared to that, it really hasn't been that long since slavery was ended.

[Alvecia]

So today we learned that equal opportunities is a racist concept because it means White people can't excel.

I hate to disagree with you, but this is not what equal opportunity looks like. White people have zero opportunity to get this job.

I've asked this before, is that actually the case here?
By which I mean are these internships being offered in other places by other people, or is it just this organisation that's alowed to advertise them?

[HMS Vanguard]

The free market is a natural experiment measuring productivity. If this filtering does not represent selection for actual superior productivity, companies that do it tend to go out of business. Therefore it should be small or non-existent. Discrimination as an explanation for income and employment gap simply does not make sense in a market economy.

It does if it serves as a proxy for factors that are more difficult to measure but not necessarily intrinsic to race, produced by discrimination.

I am not sure what you mean here. Pretty much everything on my CV serves as a proxy for other factors that are difficult to directly measure - my future employer does not care that I did a good job at my old employer as such, he cares that I have traits that make me likely to do a good job for him, which he tries to measure by seeing if I did a good job for my old employer.

It also does if the disadvantage created by overlooking potentially underpriced quality employees is small, which is the case if we're talking about a relatively small minority of the population.

Huh, US population is only 65% non-Hispanic white. There are many states that have been over 30% black for centuries.

For example, the primary and secondary school systems are not really subject to market forces in a significant way. The heavier-handed forms of disciplinary action within the primary and secondary school systems are applied unevenly based on race and sex, and actively inhibit success within the educational system, both in terms of graduation, in terms of actual learning, and in terms of the construction of social support networks.

The school system is owned by the government and therefore not subject to market forces. But as you pointed out yourself, the government parts of the economy discriminate wildly in favour of Blacks and Mestizos, and against Whites and Asians. If vague, subconscious, unwitting discrimination were to blame for gaps, we'd expect it to be far more pronounced in the government economy, where there's no market selection mechanism against unwitting but maladaptive practices. Instead, it's more pronounced in the competitive economy. This strongly suggests that the aptitude gap is real and that government discrimination is anti-meritocratic.

The most parsimonious explanation for the US's racial caste system is underlying productivity differences, with the most to least productive races being: asian, white, mestizo [Hispanic], black.

And yet white man / asian woman couples have higher household incomes than dual asian couples.

Which signifies what?

Note that the least productive non-white race is the one that has been in the US longest, has the highest integrated historical income and wealth, and the most political power.

I don't know what you mean by "historical income and wealth," but black wealth and income have historically been quite low, and in the many of the few cases that a black middle class developed early on in the US (e.g., Wilmington in the late 19th century, Tulsa in the early 20th century) it has been subsequently burned out in riots.

When it comes to families resident within the same polity, it takes on the order of 10 generations for a significant advantage to be washed out. Compared to that, it really hasn't been that long since slavery was ended.

Black income and wealth have been low relative to other inhabitants of the world's richest country. Black income and wealth in 1955 was not low relative to Asian income and wealth in Maoist China at that time.

[Great Kauthar]

Going by the leftist definition of racist, I'm a proud racist. Every year I get more racist like how pokemon level up and get experience points.

Every year? You've only been on this earth 14 years babe, most of which you couldn't really think for. I doubt you've had much of a progression.

Don't call me babe.

[Braecland]

A voice of reason, I was beginning to lose hope in NS once more.

I support Bernie Sanders.

Nobody's perfect

[Jeckland]

It's a typical example of the sweeping "positive discrimination" in 21st century society. For example, there are quotas saying certain amounts of women and ethnic minorities must be on boards, committees, etc. But have you ever seen a quota for white men?

[Tierra Prime]

It doesn't matter if Creative Access is focused on minorities, you still can't legally bar people from applying based on the colour of their skin.

[Alvecia]

It doesn't matter if Creative Access is focused on minorities, you still can't legally bar people from applying based on the colour of their skin.

Which more than anything indicates this was a public offer that Creative Access simply promoted.

[Wallenburg]

I hate to disagree with you, but this is not what equal opportunity looks like. White people have zero opportunity to get this job.

I've asked this before, is that actually the case here?
By which I mean are these internships being offered in other places by other people, or is it just this organisation that's alowed to advertise them?

That there is a Job B does not mean that barring whites from even applying for Job A is acceptable.

[Alvecia]

I've asked this before, is that actually the case here?
By which I mean are these internships being offered in other places by other people, or is it just this organisation that's alowed to advertise them?

That there is a Job B does not mean that barring whites from even applying for Job A is acceptable.

What I'm asking is are they actually barring whites?
By which I mean is the exact same offer open elsewhere? If so that would put the legal and or moral pressure on Creative Access, not the BBC.

[Braecland]

Behold, social justice's version of original sin. And people say it isn't a religious cult. Remember people, it's not enough to be anti-racist, you have to actively dismantle white privilege by segregating and discriminating based on arbitrary features like skin colour and ethnicity.

What the fuck are you even talking about? Seriously? Do you genuinely believe time moves in separated blocks, having no affect on one another and being entirely unrelated? Do you deny that, on average, racist parents are likely to raise children with ingrained racial prejudice, because of the behavior and statements of the most influential figures in their lives? Do you truly believe that a society based on, say, the institution of slavery, can have that institution abolished with no ripples in the cultural-timeline-pond?

Perhaps in many cases, yes but what you're saying is denying the individual's capacity to be their own person with their own thoughts and beleifs, beleive it or not, people are not their parents.

What you're saying is that white people are racist, whether they know it or not, no? It's complete tosh and I'm not buying it. Also, please explain how on earth is my society based on slavery?

[Tierra Prime]

It doesn't matter if Creative Access is focused on minorities, you still can't legally bar people from applying based on the colour of their skin.

Which more than anything indicates this was a public offer that Creative Access simply promoted.

The point is that whoever created the offer broke the law by making it exclusive to people of a select group.

[Stormopolis]

Well, you folks should be excited. National Geographic suggests there will be no more white race in America in 2050.
http://thehigherlearning.com/2014/04/13/national-geographic-predicted-what-americans-will-look-like-2050/

Exactly what the Coudenhove Kalergi plan asks for: a mixed race with no ties to any one country, making it easier to control. Already in America, coming to Europe ...well, now. But they, you people couldn't care less. Apparently genocide is okay when it's done on whites, too.

Thanks, guys.

[Braecland]

Well, you folks should be excited. National Geographic suggests there will be no more white race in America in 2050.
http://thehigherlearning.com/2014/04/13/national-geographic-predicted-what-americans-will-look-like-2050/

Exactly what the Coudenhove Kalergi plan asks for: a mixed race with no ties to any one country, making it easier to control. Already in America, coming to Europe ...well, now. But they, you people couldn't care less. Apparently genocide is okay when it's done on whites, too.

Thanks, guys.

Seriously?

[Vassenor]

Apparently genocide is okay when it's done on whites, too.

Way to put words in everyone's mouths.

[Wallenburg]

Well, you folks should be excited. National Geographic suggests there will be no more white race in America in 2050.
http://thehigherlearning.com/2014/04/13/national-geographic-predicted-what-americans-will-look-like-2050/

That isn't even remotely what the article says, and this is totally off topic.

Exactly what the Coudenhove Kalergi plan asks for: a mixed race with no ties to any one country, making it easier to control. Already in America, coming to Europe ...well, now. But they, you people couldn't care less.

http://www.visualphotos.com/photo/2x157 ... n-sofa.jpg
Apparently mixed race people are willing to die for their country, so what was that again?

Apparently genocide is okay when it's done on whites, too.

Thanks, guys.

[/quote]
Being non-white is not mass murder, bruh.

[Gauthier]

Absolutely nothing condescending or patronizing to minorities seeking employment that they have to rely on whites rather than someone they can relate better to. Next there should be committees on women's reproductive health staffed entirely by men.

[Liriena]

Well, you folks should be excited. National Geographic suggests there will be no more white race in America in 2050.
http://thehigherlearning.com/2014/04/13/national-geographic-predicted-what-americans-will-look-like-2050/

Exactly what the Coudenhove Kalergi plan asks for: a mixed race with no ties to any one country, making it easier to control. Already in America, coming to Europe ...well, now. But they, you people couldn't care less. Apparently genocide is okay when it's done on whites, too.

Thanks, guys.

Awwwwww, you're adorable!