Most of the questions on the 2010 census short form concern race. If the government doesn’t as an institution believe that differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, or doesn’t want to provide favor based upon race, or doesn’t want to develop congressional voting districts based on race, why does it need racial data.
I believe it makes no difference whether someone is black, white, brown, red or pink with yellow pokadots, nor is it any of the government's business asking questions like that anymore than it would be for an employer in the private sector.
Therefore these questions must be considered:
The constitutional mandate for doing the census is to determine congressional representation in the House of Representatives, period. Since that is the reason for the census, the only logical conclusion is that the government needs racial data to create congressional districts to either promote or hinder representation based on race. This is a racist policy and a racist use of census data. I cannot in good conscious support racist policy, laws, or actions, so have not provided any data concerning the race of those who live in my household, and urge you to do the same. If you must enter a race I urge you to select other and write in “American” or “Human” or “Homo Sapiens”.
Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream, so do the American people, why doesn't our government share that dream?
Many is the time I've sat talking with friends and others on this general topic. Invariably, there are those who point out the egregious racial discrimination of past decades, and the fact that discrimination based on religion, sexual practice, gender,appearance, etc., is still alive and well in the US of A. The argument follows that "corrective measures" are needed to "right wrongs" until we reach a "fair" and unbiased plateau, at which point they will no longer be necessary. It sounds so reasonable, on the surface.
ReplyDeleteLook below the surface, however, and what you find is that these practices only serve to further ingrain color vision (and other skewed paradigms), rendering the sacred plateau of color blindness unatainable. Further, they remove from play (or signifigantly limit the impact of) the single most reasonable, "fair", logical, long term viable yardstick by which to measure individuals - the substance of the individual themself. "Substance" being the character, ethics, behaviors, choices, actions, capabilities and attitudes of a person.
In the short term, removing measures designed to promote "fairness" would be very painful, and likely result in a temporary exacerbation of discriminatory practices. I seriously doubt it would last long, however, because human instincts of self preservation and an inclinatio toward profit motive are EXTREMELY strong motivators, and not just on the individual level. Corporations and organizations won't last long if they continue to hire based on anything other than substance and potential PROVIDED SOCIETAL SUPPORTS FOR DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES are removed completely.
Personally, I'm ready for some short term pain and long term gain. Heaven knows our society has suffered enough long term discriminatory pain already.