Racial Representation in Democracy
I was wondering, and I think it's a good idea, that there is a democratic representative for each ethnic group in a population for the sole purpose of raising issues that affect that ethinicity. Eg in America there is a situation where black people keep being shot. If there was an ethnic representative then he could continually raise this issue to the government. There is a problem that some voices won't be heard and that there will be serious injustices happening systematically because of tensions between ethnic groups. If there is an ethnic representative then at least these people can have their voice heard so that they don't have to resort to violence.
Scroll to see replies
Original post by The_Last_Melon
Eg in America there is a situation where black people keep being shot.
How dense can you be? Anyone getting shot is an issue, doesn't matter what race the person is.
Stop being so obsessed over race, racism won't end if people are obsessed with race.
Original post by harinimnida
How dense can you be? Anyone getting shot is an issue, doesn't matter what race the person is.
Stop being so obsessed over race, racism won't end if people are obsessed with race.
Stop being so obsessed over race, racism won't end if people are obsessed with race.
There are fundamental differences between the races which I enjoy learning about. Also, who are you to tell me to stop thinking about something?
By the way this is a political/societal discussion so if you came here to be toxic rather than discuss an issue then please swiftly depart.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by harinimnida
How dense can you be? Anyone getting shot is an issue, doesn't matter what race the person is.
Stop being so obsessed over race, racism won't end if people are obsessed with race.
Stop being so obsessed over race, racism won't end if people are obsessed with race.
Racism also won't end if you ignore it. You need to talk about it first to start doing something about it
There are 3 steps, first there will be positions where there is a waste of money or perceived waste, I.e. "euurrr the white are so super privileged your wasting money giving them a guy"
Step 2 such positions are removed
Step 3 congratulations, you have now returned to the standard "we should defeat racism by being racist"
Posted from TSR Mobile
Step 2 such positions are removed
Step 3 congratulations, you have now returned to the standard "we should defeat racism by being racist"
Posted from TSR Mobile
As a racial minority, I don't need an individual who has the same race as me to raise specific issues. This assumes that people of other races are intellectually and emotionally incapable of appreciating what their fellow countrymen and women are experiencing (which in itself is racist).
Instead, I should have the right to choose whomever I want, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation.
Instead, I should have the right to choose whomever I want, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation.
Original post by The_Last_Melon
I was wondering, and I think it's a good idea, that there is a democratic representative for each ethnic group in a population for the sole purpose of raising issues that affect that ethinicity. Eg in America there is a situation where black people keep being shot. If there was an ethnic representative then he could continually raise this issue to the government. There is a problem that some voices won't be heard and that there will be serious injustices happening systematically because of tensions between ethnic groups. If there is an ethnic representative then at least these people can have their voice heard so that they don't have to resort to violence.
Interesting. India reserves two seats in its parliament for the Anglo-Indian minority.
In the US, there are black congressman and senators, but it's also true to say they are not well-represented. There are 100 senators (two from each state), and African-Americans are about 13% of the population if I recall correctly, but they only have two senators.
By contrast, one prominent family from the southwest, the Udall-Lee family, have four senators. That shows how disparate representation can be
Original post by Aceadria
As a racial minority, I don't need an individual who has the same race as me to raise specific issues. This assumes that people of other races are intellectually and emotionally incapable of appreciating what their fellow countrymen and women are experiencing (which in itself is racist).
Instead, I should have the right to choose whomever I want, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation.
Instead, I should have the right to choose whomever I want, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation.
You might do after the next election.
Original post by The_Last_Melon
You might do after the next election.
Why?
Original post by Aceadria
Why?
The far-right parties are taking off like a rocket atm.
Original post by MostUnciviIised
In the US, there are black congressman and senators, but it's also true to say they are not well-represented. There are 100 senators (two from each state), and African-Americans are about 13% of the population if I recall correctly, but they only have two senators.
By contrast, one prominent family from the southwest, the Udall-Lee family, have four senators. That shows how disparate representation can be
In the US, there are black congressman and senators, but it's also true to say they are not well-represented. There are 100 senators (two from each state), and African-Americans are about 13% of the population if I recall correctly, but they only have two senators.
By contrast, one prominent family from the southwest, the Udall-Lee family, have four senators. That shows how disparate representation can be
You forgot to mention their president...
Original post by The_Last_Melon
The far-right parties are taking off like a rocket atm.
UKIP? Front National? SVP?
None of those parties incite racial hatred. Try again.
what are stupid idea
if different races require different representation, that suggests that they aren't equal in their natures. and they are.
if different races require different representation, that suggests that they aren't equal in their natures. and they are.
I know this is completely irrelevant but have any of you noticed how some people claim the republican party is just filled with old white men while the republican is more "diverse" democratic party? Elderly white men are cute though.
I'm not how that is really going to play out. Just because two people share the same skin color or culture doesn't mean "oh, well they have the same beliefs on a topic". Yeah, black people got shot in the USA but most of the time its black people shooting black people. Other races get shot by the police too but it doesn't bring enough rating as a black person shot by a white cop. The media only tells you those stories.
I'm not how that is really going to play out. Just because two people share the same skin color or culture doesn't mean "oh, well they have the same beliefs on a topic". Yeah, black people got shot in the USA but most of the time its black people shooting black people. Other races get shot by the police too but it doesn't bring enough rating as a black person shot by a white cop. The media only tells you those stories.
(edited 8 years ago)
I disagree because not everyone will be represented so others will complain and it will make more hassle than it is worth.
The democracy would lose its purpose if you allocated the number of places in Parliament, for example, to represent the ethnic diversity of Britain. It is about people who care about Politics and their Society, stepping up and representing a party to help make their constituency a better place. And trying to allocate this to minorities to engage them will perhaps be hindering to the idea of a democracy.
However, it is important for people to encourage ethnic minorities to be involved in Politics and take up leadership roles. For this to happen, we might have to better provide them with opportunities and encourage their potential ambitions. It is evident in the UK, the rich, aristocrats have the best opportunnities to rule the country. See the Bullingdon Club for example, or the Alumni of Eton, which goes to show that people who have more money have better chances.
This can be very hard for the average immigrant ethnic family, as state school education is of adequate quality and social pressure may inhibit their development. Many aren't even encouraged and do not aim THAT high. It is all very complicated but I'm just trying to say that we need to try and widen the horizon for ethnic groups to enter politics.
However, it is important for people to encourage ethnic minorities to be involved in Politics and take up leadership roles. For this to happen, we might have to better provide them with opportunities and encourage their potential ambitions. It is evident in the UK, the rich, aristocrats have the best opportunnities to rule the country. See the Bullingdon Club for example, or the Alumni of Eton, which goes to show that people who have more money have better chances.
This can be very hard for the average immigrant ethnic family, as state school education is of adequate quality and social pressure may inhibit their development. Many aren't even encouraged and do not aim THAT high. It is all very complicated but I'm just trying to say that we need to try and widen the horizon for ethnic groups to enter politics.
There should be better proportional ethnic representation in congress and parliament.
Lol ok.
Original post by Aceadria
UKIP? Front National? SVP?
None of those parties incite racial hatred. Try again.
None of those parties incite racial hatred. Try again.
Lol ok.
Original post by Truths
Lol ok.
Rather than listening to the mass media, it would be nice if you did your own research. You'd find that nationalism does not necessarily equal racism.
Original post by sleepysnooze
what are stupid idea
if different races require different representation, that suggests that they aren't equal in their natures. and they are.
if different races require different representation, that suggests that they aren't equal in their natures. and they are.
I guess that's why there are so many black swimmers and white sprinters.
Original post by Aceadria
Rather than listening to the mass media, it would be nice if you did your own research. You'd find that nationalism does not necessarily equal racism.
And rather than relying on mere good faith, take a look at history. Where you already have a cosmopolitan society, racism will be a byproduct of nationalism.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
