A few thoughts on rascism / affirmative action

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are you suggesting that perhaps our strength doesn't lie in our diversity? Off to re-education camp with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. I'm not advocating that everyone be like me. Maybe I'd be wrong and my homogenous company wouldn't be successful after all, but if this is the land of opportunity and freedom, I should at least be given a shot and not be quashed by discriminatory AA laws, don't you think?

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to agree with Daryl here, and I think some of you are taking what he says the wrong way. He is not implying that whites are superior to blacks, simply that an employer should be able to do whatever he thinks will help his profit line, even if it is at whim.

Let's suppose I (white male) apply for a job at the local Chinese restaurant. The workers there all prefer speaking Cantanese amongst themselves, and they benefit from the commaraderie of working with people they psychologically feel more comfortable around. I do not think there would be anything wrong with the restaurant owner hiring a Chinese person instead of me, even if I was more qualified. Does anyone really disagree with this?

[Darryl_P]

OK fair enough, I guess I misunderstood. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[kickabuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Kick,

I've been around the world and I've seen plenty of people of all colors. I'm not the type to make a blanket statement like "whites are better than blacks" in an overall sense and quite frankly I don't even believe this, despite having been called a white supremacist bigot on numerous occasions.

However, I see nothing wrong with people of any color wanting to hang out with people of the same color. And if there's a company with a homogenous group of employees who think this way and need to work together on various projects, then it could very well be the case that keeping this homogeneity is a plus for the overall business vs. introducing diversity.

So my point is that there may be factors in a hiring decision that go beyond an individual's qualifications. The expected chemistry with other employees is also a factor in some situations. If those other employees feel more secure working with people of a similar ancestry to themselves, then that will impact the bottom line whether anyone wants to talk about it or not. A prudent businessman will take this, along with the other factors, into consideration IMO.

Note that my views are symmetrical on this matter. If a Silicon Valley company was developing some new computer product and felt it would be advantageous to hire only Chinese people, I wouldn't be outraged, nor would I think anyone else should be. After all, we are free to start up a competing company and try to put them out of business by simply being superior. And if we can't be superior, then hats off to them for producing a world class product. I'll be right there in line when they put it up for sale.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well one can legitimately hold this view, although I don't feel it is one that is applicable in most work environments. However this view can easily be abused by an employer who wants to actively discriminate, he can say 'well I was just looking out for my work environment and doing what I felt would maximize productivity, that's why I never hire any non-Caucasians'. Who could argue? Too easy to abuse.

[ShakeZula06]

Did it ever occur to you that maybe 5 white people might be easier working with a white guy then a black guy because of people like you running around saying it'll be uncomfortable? More comfortable working with people that share the same ancestory? Why is that not something that comes to my head when Im talking to someone? "hm, he doesn't have Irish and German grandmother, only italian and puertica rican, now it'll just be to awkward."

It's 2006, black and white people have been intermingling for a while now, sorry if that makes you feel uncomfortable.

For the record I am 100% against AA in all it's forms.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
Well one can legitimately hold this view, although I don't feel it is one that is applicable in most work environments. However this view can easily be abused by an employer who wants to actively discriminate, he can say 'well I was just looking out for my work environment and doing what I felt would maximize productivity, that's why I never hire any non-Caucasians'. Who could argue? Too easy to abuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

your assuming that there will be no repricusions (sp?) from the free market for discrimination.

[kickabuck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well one can legitimately hold this view, although I don't feel it is one that is applicable in most work environments. However this view can easily be abused by an employer who wants to actively discriminate, he can say 'well I was just looking out for my work environment and doing what I felt would maximize productivity, that's why I never hire any non-Caucasians'. Who could argue? Too easy to abuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

your assuming that there will be no repricusions (sp?) from the free market for discrimination.

[/ QUOTE ]

Repercussions from the free market may or may not occur or be of consequence to the employer, this is a separate issue from the morality of allowing people to be racially discriminatory in their hiring practices.

[Darryl_P]

[ QUOTE ]
Did it ever occur to you that maybe 5 white people might be easier working with a white guy then a black guy because of people like you running around saying it'll be uncomfortable? More comfortable working with people that share the same ancestory? Why is that not something that comes to my head when Im talking to someone? "hm, he doesn't have Irish and German grandmother, only italian and puertica rican, now it'll just be to awkward."


[/ QUOTE ]

My observations are that the shorter and less significant the interaction, the less it matters what someone's ancestry is.

Of course I could do a business transaction or even have a business partnership with anyone of any background, and the differences wouldn't matter. But if you identify closely with your job and view your colleagues as an extended family of sorts, then it could make a difference.

Some people insist on having family businesses and excluding everyone who is non-family. I suppose you don't see a problem in that, right? Others accept all comers. This is the modern norm so that can't be bad either. What's wrong philosophically with drawing the line somewhere in between? What if race is not specifically mentioned but I only hire people I like and they happen to be mostly white? Would I be doing something wrong? If so, then why can't I choose people I like to work with for whatever reason I want?

[laurentia]

[ QUOTE ]
This is society's responsibility to wake up, and stop thinking that the black guy who just moved in is going to break into your house, steal your TV, pawn it and buy crack [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah let's wake up and disregard all statistics..

[Darryl_P]

[ QUOTE ]
Who could argue? Too easy to abuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets consider someone who does abuse it and never hires blacks because of pure racism. Does he gain from this?

If so, why? I mean if he's foregoing opportunities to hire good workers and leaving them for his competitors, then how can that be good for him in the long run?

If it's not good for him, then why not just let him shoot himself in the foot and have him find out the hard way?

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

If all my employees thought this way, then I would agree.


[/ QUOTE ]

Who exactly runs the company? You, or your employees?

Maybe it's just me, but if it were my company, my employees are going to follow my marching orders, not vice versa.

And if a group of employees are going to tell me they can't work with someone who is more qualified because of their skin color.....then it's their asses that are going to be finding new jobs while I bring in the folks most qualified.

But then again, the inmates don't run my asylum.