On 29-1-2010 23:14, Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>>   It's puzzling indeed. I'm trying to think how you could create an exam
>>> which would be disadvantageous to black people, and I can't think of anything.
> 
>> There are certain tests you can give that would discriminate. Perhaps blacks 
>> are more poor or worse educated, so if you asked about proper grammar or 
>> financial questions, you could discriminate.
> 
>   Even if that's so (ie. black people in the US having in average a poorer
> education), I don't see how it's discriminating against blacks per se.
> If anything, it would be "discrimination" against uneducated people (if
> such a thing is feasible). Any person, regardless of skin tone, would score
> poorly in such a test. How is this discrimination against black people?

The main question is always: are we testing the right things. In general 
employers are asking more cultural background than is needed for the 
job. Simply because they want the best person, not the one just right 
for the job. In doing so they discriminate against people from less 
wealthy backgrounds and thereby de facto against black people.

>   If the problem is that black people are in average more uneducated, the
> proper solution to that problem is not to dumb down admission tests (which
> in itself ought to have rather negative consequences related to job
> performance and perhaps in some cases even safety), but to educate them.

Keep in mind that education of minorities is not a priority for many 
white politicians. They tend to support laws that unintentionally hurts 
minority education more than that of their own children. All with the 
best intentions of course. (note that this is based on a generalization 
of what I understand from people and US conservatives in particular. I 
don't live there and I don't have explicit examples).

> (If black people, for whatever reason, do not *want* to get educated, well
> that's hardly a problem with the fire department, is it?)

I covered that elsewhere, I think.

>   In fact, if the reason for the justice system to demand dumbing down the
> tests so that black people can score better is because they are uneducated,
> I see an irony here: By trying to be "politically correct" and offer "equal
> opportunity", the justice system is actually openly admitting that black
> people are uneducated compared to white people. What kind of message is
> this sending to the population?
> 
>> I remember reading about this - they had to drop the test a couple of years 
>> because none of the blacks who applied for the promotion that the test 
>> enabled actually passed the test.
> 
>   How is that the fire department's fault or problem? If they are applying
> the exact same test equally and fairly to all applicants, that's the very
> definition of non-discrimination.

No it isn't.

>   Discrimination is when some people get preferential treatment over others.

for reasons that are irrelevant to the matter.

>> Note that in this country, the simple fact that blacks don't pass the test 
>> makes it very difficult to legally claim the test isn't "discriminatory" in 
>> the sense that this article means it. Folks claiming that don't have to 
>> prove there's something biased on the test. You have to prove there's some 
>> other reason that skin color corresponds to success rate.
> 
>   Hate to sound like an antimulticulturalist again, 

To me you just sound like someone from a protected background with 
relative little experience in the real world. ;)

Post a reply to this message