 |
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dissident
boohoo.
Whites get so many advantages, who really cares if other groups are brought back to a level playing field. |
While thats true in many places, my experience growing up was different. Newfoundland Canada has not been good economically for quite a while so there has not been much immigration. The result was a lilly white population where any visible minority person was likely a doctor or engineer or professor. That was my experience growing up-- "White" folks made up 99% of the population while "minorities" were almost exclusively in the top 10% or so of income.
Actually just last summer a minority friend of mine was in rural Newfoundland and stopped at a bar. The bartender inquired if he was a doctor? he was puzzled until the bartender pointed out the group of doctors at a back table ( all but one was non-white)
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Wezil
This is the relevant bit - the Charter.
Yes, under our BS Charter such practices are allowed and as you know, the Charter trumps provincial (or federal) human rights legislation.
All animals are equal in Canada, but some animals are more equal than others. The Constitution says so. |
Not really. First recourse on discrimination matters is to the appropriate human rights commission. Here there is no recourse
And while the Charter does "trump" human rights legislation in a way ( in the same way that it "trumps" all legislation) it specifically permits AA. Now if the exception for disadvantaged groups did NOT exist, you could have a fun Charter argument. A person discriminated against from an "advantaged group" could argue that the human rights legislation permitting affirmative action was a violation of their Charter Rights. The government would have to acknowledge that affirmative action IS discrimination on prohibited grounds ( race) and then argue the section 1 proportionality test to save the legislation.
Instead, they saved themselves the hassle and decreed it right there in the Charter -- affirmative action=/forums/OK. Personally I think they could have won the argument anyway.
There is part of me that wishes that affirmative action programs themselves had to be "proportional".
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Wezil
Perhaps, but I would like to hear the argument made and the policy defended.
|
I agree. I would have also liked to have heard the argument. Given the makeup of the SCC I tend to think it would be a slam dunk for the government but who knows.
My other beef with AA is that it sterotypes . In law school one of my classmates was a black woman in the AA admission program. Despite the fact that she was the daughter of a dentist and a surgeon, FINANCIAL assistance was an automatic part of the program with no variation for individual circumstances. Several of the other program participants were also from affluent backgrounds.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by St Leo
[I think "protection racket" is a better analogy.
A modern democracy is a protection racket ran by the people for the people. It is far better than a feudal monarchy or an absolute dictatorship or any nonsense like that, because those are protection rackets ran by the affluent for the affluent.
Anarchy is an interesting notion, but I suspect that a government of some sort will be necessary as long as humans are around other humans. And, on the whole, I'd rather have a good government than any other kind, including "minimal". |
I have a hard time with the idea that government is only by or for the affluent. If that was the case, taxes would be much flatter than they are now and everyone would be convinced that this was "fair".
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000 time: 22:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by St Leo
quote: Originally posted by Flubber
I have a hard time with the idea that government is only by or for the affluent. If that was the case, taxes would be much flatter than they are now and everyone would be convinced that this was "fair". |
You may want to read my post again. |
ah rereading . . .. I now wonder who you think that current governments are a protection racket for. Who is protecting whom ??
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
quote: Whites get so many advantages, who really cares if other groups are brought back to a level playing field. |
One reason is because it sets a bad practice. Well you could say continues and condones a bad practice since instead of "No Blacks Need Apply" they simply changed the race.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22. Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|