5 ms·
The distinction is "institutional racism" vs "personal racism". Is it possible that nobody had deliberate malicious intent in this matter? Completely. But what
by z3c0 4y ago
The distinction is "institutional racism" vs "personal racism". Is it possible that nobody had deliberate malicious intent in this matter? Completely. But what "institutional racism" deals with is if one race is disproportionately affected by a policy over others, which is more often than not caused by socioeconomic factors that weren't considered during the creation of the policy. Usually, it's only ignorance at play, but it's still not good to create a system that has a "net racist" effect without at least trying to understand why.
- rajin444 4y ago> “institutional racism" deals with is if one race is disproportionately affected by a policy over others, which is more often than not caused by socioeconomic factors that weren't considered during the creation of the policy How do you prove these things are caused by socioeconomic factors? At a minimum we have nowhere near the genetic understanding to control for those aspects. At a higher level, human society, culture, and the systems created by it are infinitely complex. Grouping people on 1 axis then saying the reason for this grouping is “socioeconomic” seems…optimistic at best. There are so many reasons one racial grouping may be disparately impacted by something. We should focus on fixing the downsides of that impact for all people, not asking why X arbitrary category we came up with doesn’t match Y (because the answer to question is far beyond our technical ability). And our metric of success cannot be “x group more affected” - if we make that our metric, we’ll find a way to hit that target, correct or not.
- soco 4y agoThis sounds very nihilistic, or maybe libertarian I can't tell the difference. My point is, we must do something and as engineers we work based on data. Now you can argue successfully that data is not perfect, but if the alternative is (institutional) paralysis, then what? A state cannot afford to be that zen regarding the well-being of its citizens.
- choko 4y agoThis sounds authoritarian, or maybe progressive. I can't tell the difference. My point is that data without context is almost worthless when crafting policy.
- rajin444 4y agoI agree we must do something! It's much more reliable to talk with individuals and assess instances of racism, discrimination, etc. on a case base case basis (taking into account other evidence). We don't have to be paralyzed.
- choko 4y agoThis is another case where those of us that view the world through the lens of race are again moving the racist goalposts. Enacting a policy without race in mind, then have that policy impact one race more than another is not racist unless the intent was specifically to oppress a given group. Are laws against killing racist, even though some groups are disproportionately represented in the statistics? Intent matters.
- TheNewsIsHere 4y agoIntent absolutely matters, but I submit that despite intent outcomes are often just as important. Not regarding race in the construction of a policy is not necessarily racism. But if the outcomes of a policy disproportionately negatively effect one or more races, then surely we should rethink that policy.
- z3c0 4y ago"The road to hell is paved with good intentions". Obviously someone who intends to do harm is worse than someone who doesn't, but hopefully, you realize that people can do bad things unintentionally, and that outcomes are just as important as the intentions that led to them.
- rs999gti 4y ago> "institutional racism" vs "personal racism" Also you cannot apply US or CA values to the rest of the world.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]