Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've noticed that conservatives are generally supportive of colorblind approaches to things like hiring, college admissions, and government funding, but are generally quick to resort to color-conscious approaches to things like law enforcement and prevention (e.g., racial profiling), and usually condone "rationally" discriminating against certain segments of the population perceived to be of greater statistical "threat". What accounts for this disparity in adherence to the colorblind ideal?
Most conservatives do not support racial profiling or "rationally discriminating against" anyone.
Thread fail.
You sure about that? Noted conservative author Dinesh D'Souza for instance wrote a 500 page treatise years ago that essentially explained why racial profiling "made sense" and why affirmative action didn't. Many conservatives think like him. I'm just trying to understand the reason for the inconsistency.
The two concepts are different. The first one is based on absolutes. Hire X of Y for example. The second is based on statistical averages, but the characteristic is not used as a final decision maker (who to admit to a school, charge with a crime, etc). The first one is also not based on effectiveness, but on social engineering, whereas the second is strictly for the purpose of effectiveness.
If a school were to judge based on SES, and make assumptions about races (based on rational statistical race/income correlations) during the consideration process simply for the purpose of expediency, I wouldn't have a problem with it. And in the inverse, if cops were to take an absolute position of "pull over all black drivers" I would have a problem with it.
As far as racial profiling goes, it's simply not effective if race is a large factor anyway - I just don't think we should bar ourselves completely from looking at traits which are after all arbitrary for the sake of political correctness. If I go to a certain neighborhood, there is a higher likelihood I will get pulled over (they think I'm buying drugs for example). Not exactly my idea of fun but it is based on common sense.
-
Anyone who tells you they have never profiled is a damn liar. And why is profiling by race any better or worse than profiling by gender for example? Profiling is simply risk analysis, there is no "right" or "wrong" as long as it's based on logic. As I said, the problem arises when it comes down to absolutes - but in that case it is no longer effective profiling, because it is no longer logical.
You sure about that? Noted conservative author Dinesh D'Souza for instance wrote a 500 page treatise years ago that essentially explained why racial profiling "made sense" and why affirmative action didn't. Many conservatives think like him. I'm just trying to understand the reason for the inconsistency.
Because they are racist hypocrites. There is no rocket science here.
Because they are racist hypocrites. There is no rocket science here.
I've noticed that liberals are generally against colorblind approaches to things like hiring, college admissions, and government funding, but are generally against color-conscious approaches to things like law enforcement and prevention (e.g., racial profiling), and usually do not condone "rationally" discriminating against certain segments of the population perceived to be of greater statistical "threat". What accounts for this disparity in adherence to the colorblind ideal?
You sure about that? Noted conservative author Dinesh D'Souza for instance wrote a 500 page treatise years ago that essentially explained why racial profiling "made sense" and why affirmative action didn't. Many conservatives think like him. I'm just trying to understand the reason for the inconsistency.
I don't know many conservatives who think that racial profiling makes sense.
I support a greater police presence in certain high crime areas, but that is not the same as racial profiling by any stretch.
I am against affirmative action but am for bans on discrimination.
Most conservatives do not support racial profiling or "rationally discriminating against" anyone.
Thread fail.
I think he has a valid point, af. A lot of conservatives do support racial (and religious) profiling. Herman Cain wanted special loyalty tests for Muslims in government, remember?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
