Talk

Advanced search

to think that it is racist

(68 Posts)
ConferencePear Sun 21-Jan-18 23:07:40

of the Labour party to charge different entry fees for different ethnic groups ?
I find this quite difficult to believe and wonder why it is not in the national newspapers.

www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/tories-accuse-labour-racism-over-1096236

Regularsizedrudy Sun 21-Jan-18 23:10:09

Is it true though? Is there an actual source given? I just skimmed tbh

UpstartCrow Sun 21-Jan-18 23:15:11

Generally, a policy of positive discrimination is permitted if they are doing it to redress an imbalance. If they have a similar reduction for the unemployed or low paid then I don't think it would count as discrimination.

Overall I think Labour are tone deaf and havent read the Equality Act. Part 1 covers socio-economic differences, they might want to consider why its included.

Ylvamoon Sun 21-Jan-18 23:19:37

biscuit

duckdarlington Sun 21-Jan-18 23:27:38

@Ylvamoon

What does the sunflower emoji mean on mn? Ive seen it quite of lot recently.

Sorry I dont have anything relevant to add to the thread but if its true I would think it was wrong

LadyIsabellaWrotham Sun 21-Jan-18 23:33:18

I’ve seen that emoji interpreted a lot of different ways but sunflower is a new one on me. It’s a biscuit, which for complex historic reasons is dished out to signify “oh ffs, I can’t even be bothered to engage with this”

MrsTerryPratchett Mon 22-Jan-18 00:48:18

Racism is prejudice plus power. If Labour believes they are addressing a systematic issue with PoC being unable to access political life because of a pay gap and therefore lower wages, it's not racism. It might be prejudice.

Personally, I think it's tone deaf. I think Labour have lost touch with their working class roots. People with disabilities, unemployed, women, PoC, working class people all have less money on average than Labour's current base. 40 quid is a lot for a lot of people.

Battleax Mon 22-Jan-18 01:06:40

Somehow, I could believe that.

Labour have gone quite, quite mad of late.

Awwlookatmybabyspider Mon 22-Jan-18 01:54:24

YANBU. It is racism. When ever there is a wiff a racism toward blacks or Asians everyone is up in arms, and Yes rightfully so. However when ever there is racism against whites. Which in this case there has been. We get the biscuits. Why.!!!!
Come on let's have a mature honest discussion. We're all big girLs.

Forkhandles22 Mon 22-Jan-18 01:55:30

It is racist because being Bame members don’t all earn less than white people on average.
Source: www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/work-pay-and-benefits/pay-and-income/household-income/latest
Black people do. But Indian, Chinese & Asian Other are all above white British in the highest earnings category.
If this blatant racism were challenged in a court I expect the courts wouldn’t be ruling in labours favour. But then labour would probably just add exceptions to the equality’s act, just like they did with all women shortlists. As a woman, Labour have no idea what the word equality means.

thebewilderness Mon 22-Jan-18 02:04:43

Is subsidizing an under represented group actually charging the over represented group more. No. Nor is it racism. It is an effort to increase attendance by a specific demographic.

streetlife70s Mon 22-Jan-18 02:07:58

It’s prejudice and tone deaf agreed. But you cannot be racist against white people in the same way you cannot be sexist against men. I know not everyone agrees but true racism and sexism, as argued by sociologists, activists and academics has been widely agreed as: Prejudice PLUS power.

As ethnicised groups and females do not hold power at societal structural level, positive discrimination to redress balance is not the same as racism at all.

However, I agree with PP. It’s not a sensible decision and runs the risk of alienating it’s grass roots, working class voters.

theForeigner Mon 22-Jan-18 02:11:49

Of course it's racist. Yet another example of confused society.

@streetlife70s

"But you cannot be racist against white people in the same way you cannot be sexist against men."

I didn't think anyone besides a few ignorant youtubers was actually that stupid.

thebewilderness Mon 22-Jan-18 02:16:26

You are conflating discrimination with racism. It is discriminatory to subsidize one group and not another. It is not necessarily racist.

MrsTerryPratchett Mon 22-Jan-18 02:18:12

I didn't think anyone besides a few ignorant youtubers was actually that stupid.

Understanding class analysis and systemic prejudice is 'stupid' now. Huh?

streetlife70s Mon 22-Jan-18 02:18:18

If you want to equate erudite scholars and highly respected sociologists with stupid YouTubers then you only serve to make yourself look ignorant.

LolitaLempicka Mon 22-Jan-18 02:36:33

Don’t be ridiculous, it is not racism. White people do not face oppression and persecution due to their race. As previously pointed out racism is prejudice PLUS power. Who holds power? Not BAME people. Not women.

Forkhandles22 Mon 22-Jan-18 02:40:11

@streetlife70s & MrsTerryPratchet.
Your definition of the term racism to make racism against white people seem less important and more positive is not only dangerous in the way it increases racial tensions by introducing a double standard, but doesn’t make any sense in the modern day world. Firstly, the ‘Power’ group will vary by which holds the majority in the community. Secondly ‘white guilt’ drastically effects this ‘power’ on a systemic scale and has done for decades; hence why the Rotherham victims had absolutely no power for so long. Lastly, one could argue the ‘race power’ didn’t extend to women, historically speaking; bame men had the vote, could attend uni, could keep what they earnt decades and decades before any woman could.

In today’s parliament, with around 10% of the population being Bame & 52 out of 650 members of parliament being Bame that means they are more closely represented by the numbers than disabled people, women & lgbt members.

MrsTerryPratchett Mon 22-Jan-18 02:49:08

@Forkhandles22 I made that exact point about women and people with disabilities earlier!

However, systemic racism does exist and Black people are the ones experiencing it.

'Reverse racism' is meaningless nonsense nonsense. https://youtu.be/dw_mRaIHb-M

I do agree that Labour has a massive issue with misogyny though.

theForeigner Mon 22-Jan-18 02:59:43

@streetlife70s

Are you describing yourself as a highly respected academic?

As you haven't actually backed your opinion, I will. The OED.

Racism:

prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

MrsTerryPratchett Mon 22-Jan-18 03:10:37

I've said this before but I stopped starting essays with, "the Oxford English Dictionary defines blah as blah" when I was 12.

The definition of racism is incredibly charged and I wouldn't expect a dictionary to describe it fully.

anothernetter Mon 22-Jan-18 03:14:25

'Positive' discrimination is just as bad as discrimination. It is discrimination.

streetlife70s Mon 22-Jan-18 03:16:07

@theForeigner

Wow. You couldn’t have misunderstood the post more.

Do even a tiny bit of research for yourself and you will discover that;

A) No I am not describing myself I am referring to a large body of research from experts in the field.

2) No that is not my personal ‘opinion’ that I just fancied pulling out the air, it has been developed as Mrs Terry Pratchett explains by class analysis and the study of structural inequality over many years.

3) You have just tried useing a basic dictionary guidance description to try to explain complex social issues.

4) BTW it’s ‘were’ that stupid, not ‘was’ that stupid. Ironic considering the context of your post.

Instead of coming on here in a fit of misguided fury to personally attack others, why not do a tiny bit of research of your own and then you might be able to have a counter argument actually worth engaging with.

streetlife70s Mon 22-Jan-18 03:17:00

#using#

MrsTerryPratchett Mon 22-Jan-18 03:19:26

'Positive' discrimination is just as bad as discrimination. It is discrimination.

In this case I wouldn't necessarily support what they are doing. But pretending that, for example, hiring women because they are massively underrepresented is as bad as hiring men because you think they're better, is very naive at best.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: