|
|||||||
| Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
| View Poll Results: The problem? | |||
| **** those non-English twats stealin' our jobs! |
|
2 | 11.76% |
| The Daily Mail said black people are bad so it must be true! |
|
2 | 11.76% |
| No, people like that woman are the problem! |
|
7 | 41.18% |
| That was disgraceful! They didn't even shake hands! |
|
1 | 5.88% |
| Can't we all just get along? |
|
5 | 29.41% |
| Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 (permalink) | |
|
Dat's Der Bunny!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,097
|
Quote:
@ Jansz, of course he's going to say that, but my point is that the distinction is that the racist won't actually have enough evidence to be able to make that assumption. he or she will be basing it on one bad experience or on what someone told them. As I was saying before, it might seem like semantics, but the difference between that and a position based on personal experience with a large group is significant. In the case of the Irish Councillor Darren Scully, he stated that every single time he had dealt with the local black african population (and it was a reasonable number of times), they had acted aggressively towards him when they came to him seeking help. He decided that based on the attitude of the community, he no longer felt comfortable representing them and would instead forward their problems on to someone else who could help them. Are there valid reasons for doing so? In my opinion, yes. It could have been the case that these cases were taking up so much time due to the aggressive attitude of the entire subsection of this group that he had had dealings with that it was taking away from his ability to represent the rest of his constituents, who weren't as aggressive. If you have to make a choice, surely you're going to choose the more helpful, whom you might actually be able to help? The above might not be true, but it is at least one form of justification for such a decision. I understand that there is a very thin line here. I understand how it is a short step from an assumption based on a large body of experience to assumptions based on less and less, until you are being racist. I will note that I am more than happy to be proven wrong, and I am sure Darren Scully would be happy to be proven wrong, but until such a time as I find an exception to the rule, I am going to assume the rule stands.
__________________
"I found it eventually, at the bottom of a locker in a disused laboratory, with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard". Ever thought of going into Advertising?" - Arthur Dent |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|