Justified Racism

[sobrique]

Are we ever justified in discriminating based upon race or religion?

It's a question that's raised recently. I think there's no real argument that racial discrimination is generally held to be a bad thing.

However, if we assume that all suicide bombers are from the same ethnic grouping (I'm not certain they are mind, although certainly a majority are). Is it unreasonable to ban everyone in that grouping from an action? e.g. travelling on a tube.

Is it unreasonable to pay more attention to people in that ethnic group, if they're carrying a large bag?

Is colour blindness really a virtue when the only people who are trying to kill you happen to be green?

Comments

[feanelwa.livejournal.com]

I think it is unreasonable to ban everyone in the group from doing that action, if that action is the only way they can get to where they need to go in time. I mean really, if you banned Asian people from using the Tube, every hospital in London would come to a standstill and waiting lists would be huge, because you couldn't rely on doctors to get there on time anymore.

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

If one were to extend the idea somewhat though, that _only_ that particular group were ever terrorists (ok, it's a little extreme, but the 'real' threat at the moment is suicide bombers), would it then be justified?

I mean, if by doing so, you could ensure that there was never another terrorist 'incident'.

To my mind, the answer is 'it's not justified' but I can see the BNP making quite persuasive arguments along those lines...

[mister-jack.livejournal.com]

It is never acceptable to generalise from a group to an individual. Ever.

(It's also ineffective, because if you concentrate all your efforts on a certain ethnic group you make it much easier for them to use members of a different group.)

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

Does that apply to the police? Reason I ask is because according to the radio this morning, the police are paying more attention to 'people who look like muslims with large bags' who are using public transport in London.

Should they be stopping _everyone_ who looks a bit shifty with a large bag? And if they happen to think (in light of past events) that a particular subset of people 'look a bit shifty' are they justified?

[crashbarrier.livejournal.com]

what a crass generalisation.. I mean what exactly defines a Muslim man?.. a person of Arabian ancestry perhaps.. what if it's a White anglo saxon Male.. who is a muslim, will he be greated with the same amount of suspicion from first glance.

Its the same probem as the police singling out black males in cars as theyre likely to be drugs dealers. Or cars containing more than one person that look to be late teenagers because thre cars are likely to be, filled with drugs and alcohol, illegal in some way or out to go speeding somewhwere (which happened regulary out side my college).

Its these vague racial edicts that seriously undermine the credibility of the police, They would in fatc be more sensible to be Should they be stopping _everyone_ who looks a bit shifty with a large bag? singling out one minority of people who happen to "look muslim" because they are of arabic or asian descent is just stupid as it means twenty people all just as fanatical but of other genetic ancestry are getting through... DUH!

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

Of the suicide bombings we've had in this country, how many of them have not been by young arabic males, who would most probably claim to be Muslim? (I say claim, as there's plenty of 'good' Muslims who would point out that blowing yourself and a bus load of innocents up really isn't what the Koran says).

Would it be safe to say 'all of them'?

Does that not therefore give us a good statistic to work upon - the probability of a person fitting that racial archetype being a suicide bomber is greatly increased. (OK, so it's still 'pretty damn low' but certainly the police/home office are very twitchy about the subject at the moment)

Not that I'm saying they're right mind, just that I'm wanting to open the subject for discussion :)

[(Anonymous)]

Of the suicide bombings we've had in this country, how many of them have not been by young arabic males, who would most probably claim to be Muslim? (I say claim, as there's plenty of 'good' Muslims who would point out that blowing yourself and a bus load of innocents up really isn't what the Koran says).

Would it be safe to say 'all of them'?

Pedantic point, maybe, but the answer to that is no, whichever way you meant to phrase it. Pakistanis are not Arabs. You shouldn't see Muslims as all coming from one racial group; they simply don't.

Matthew (http://clumsyinstead.blogspot.com)

[mister-jack.livejournal.com]

No. One of the 7/7 was afro-carribean.

And the overwhelming majority of terrorist and bomb attacks carried out in this country have been by whites. Usually Irishmen.

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

It may be a pedantic point, but we've not to my knowledge had irish suicide bombings ...

[crashbarrier.livejournal.com]

suppose that depends if you count "stupidly holding a badly built bomb that goes off early".. as a suicide bomber:/..

[queex.livejournal.com]

I think it hinges on the details of incident in this kind of thing.

Say there has been a rash of car thefts.

Stopping and searching black motorists because, statistically, most car crimes are committed by black youths would be unacceptable.

Stopping and searching black motorists because the gang behind the spate of thefts is known to consist of black youths is acceptable.

It's the difference between racial stereotyping and someone matching a description.

I imagine the spokesperson put it a little clumsily, but I'm guessing the trigger factor is more the bag and the shifty behaviour. I hope so, anyway. It's easy to shave off a beard or put on a Hawaian shirt.

I would have though a blanket ban on backpacks on the tube would have been more productive. Even if it didn't stop bombings it would limit the amount of explosives they could carry.

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

I admit, I'm being a little inflammatory on purpose. The reason I wanted to raise the subject is because of the same discussion on the radio this morning - "is it unfair to target arabic looking people for random searches".

[queex.livejournal.com]

Hell, if _I_ had a big bag I'd probably get stopped. As a white atheist they'd be nought for two.

The trouble is, this kind of measure (or indeed press release) causes a whole host of new problems. The idiots who go around attacking 'Mulsim-looking' people are only going to have renewed fervour, possible even some mispalced sense of helping.

Laets face it- no police force has an unblemished record when it comes to the treatment of foreigners or minorities.

[feanelwa.livejournal.com]

But if a substantial proportion of the workforce couldn't get to work on time and a this included a lot of medical professionals, then you wouldn't even need a terrorist attack for people's daily lives to become chaotic and annoying. They already would be. Such a situation would be like giving the terrorists a dishwasher to save them a job.

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

Would you say that the disruption to services that resulted was the major reason to not be so drastic in implementing such a measure?

Would it be 'reasonable' if you phased it in over a time window. Or maybe arranged segregated transport (be it taxis, the 'arabic bus' or whatever)?

[(Anonymous)]

Well no, there's also the reason that it's wrong and would make all the Asian people feel miserable.

[feanelwa.livejournal.com]

Sorry, anonymous person was me answering, I forgot to log in.

[paulw.livejournal.com]

The police only have so much resource. They need to target the profile which is more likely to produce a hit. I'm sure if they had unlimited resource they would search everyone but we live in the real world and priorities have to be chosen, even if some of them seem racist and unpopular.

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

But when you're discriminating on someone on the basis of their race, it becomes much easier to cut away 'liberties'.

It's a fairly short step from 'arabic people are suicide bombers' to 'no coloured people on public transport'.

[paulw.livejournal.com]

Why waste resource searching granny smith when you know she is in a very very low risk group. Its all about risks and profiles, unfortunatly thats the real world and the real situation the police are in.

I certainly don't want another bomb to go off because the police were too busy being politically correct.

Your example of not allowing coloured people on public transport is absurd. No one has suggested that nor will they.

My example is customs at airports. They direct resource at high risk flights and they do a good job. Should we say that flights from that country are not allowed. No, we're not. We just need to manage the high risk groups.

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

So you'd say it's not racism so much as 'direction of resources'? Especially WRT to the recent police getting heavy on 'arabic looking' types, in light of the recent bombings?

[paulw.livejournal.com]

Yes, you target the high risk groups. This is a new threat and realisticly the only way to stop suicide bombers is to either shoot them before they can set the bomb off or to target people who fit the current profile and conduct random searches.

If 80 year old women start bombing London I'm sure police will stop them if they look menacing and are carring a large bag.

[mrph.livejournal.com]

It has short-term benefits - if there are more suicide bombers waiting in the wings it's fair to assume that most of them are of asian/middle-eastern descent, just because a large percentage of the muslim population are.

However, the moment you start doing this the bombers are likely to focus on sidestepping it. As mentioned, one of the last batch was afro-caribbean. Looking at the USA, where similar checks have been carried out, we then had Richard Reid and (allegedly) Jose Padilla... one black and the other Puerto Rican. Because they don't fit the standard profile and that makes them more likely to succeed. So as a long term measure it's of very limited used.

The other point to consider is the negative effects. I'm trying not to get into the right-and-wrong ethical aspects of this, but if you assume that all Belgians (to pick a silly example) are likely to be suicide bombers, so you start stopping and searching Belgians - possibly detain a few before releasing them, maybe even a couple of incidents where someone resists arrest and gets roughed up a bit but isn't actually a terrorist...

...well, if you're relying on the Belgian community to help you find any extremists in their midst, is that going to motivate them? Or just encourage them to look the other way, because the don't exactly feel like co-operating with cops who seem to think they're all potential bombers and treat them accordingly? Look back at the years when it was possible to be 'suspiciously Irish', for example...

I'm not convinced the benefits outweigh the losses in terms of tip-offs and community relations.

[paulbroz.livejournal.com]

Restricting travel for a particular group would have certain practical issues.

However it is not unresonable to pay more attention to a person of middle eastern descent who is carrying a rucksack or wearing a large coat, simply beacuse in light of recent events there is a increased liklyhood that they are about to explode. Just the same as two Irishmen in a hire van would have garnered certain increased attention a few years back.

Granted the presence of caucasian islamist jihadis can muddy the waters somewhat, but really that is more a problem for the Russians (to be honest they are reaping what they sowed in chechenya.)

At the end of the day the muslim community needs to stop spouting that "they aren't muslims, because islam is a religion of peace" bullshit and start taking care of its own house a bit more. Simply because if something really horrible happens i very much doubt that certain fringe political elements anmd the masses of the great unwashed will exactly be thinking about issues of political correctness.

[veremit.livejournal.com]

And where does the Court of Human Rights sit on some of these issues?? I'm sure if one 'type' of person was being targetted, has this not a knock-on affect on their 'freedom'?