I suppose it’s covered in the respectfully equitable “and elsewhere” part of the title. 
re: Turkey: Same to you and yours.
1 Like
Let who “have at it”?
same here, but nearly 30 years.
i have seen foreigners, yes pale face (what is this, a Lone Ranger episode?) working in convenience store.
c’mon down south for a bit. the temps are better in the winter. don’t be afraid of the country south of Taichung
1 Like
I was curious about the definition of institutional racism since the idea seemed so vaguely defined to me. Looking it up, it seems to define racial prejudices which might still be caused by an individual, but nonetheless emerge as a trend within an institution or a community.
So while one person being rejected for a job offer because of their non-white sounding name is an act of individual bigotry, 80% of the non-white population in an area experiencing that discrimination is institutional racism. It’s a question of scale.
Which makes the word confusing, since to me “institutional racism” sounded more like “evil white board members plotting against non-whites,” the same way “patriarchy” sounds like “evil powerful men plotting against women” and “rape culture” like “society condoning rape.”
Specifically:
That’s
Grazia Deng, who studied anthropology in Hong Kong and spent 14 months undertaking fieldwork on Chinese cappuccino culture in Bologna.
So it’s plausible (based on this) that the Chinese community in Italy perceives itself as subject to institutional racism, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it is.
Some countries have official inquiries into this sort of thing, and sometimes they conclude that the police force of this or that location actually is institutionally racist, even if no individual is held responsible for the phenomenon.
Depending on how annoying the plaintiff is, a large company may indeed be willing to pay something to settle a lawsuit that has no merit, but $3M USD? That stretches credulity.
Or try Canada, where the federal government found itself on the hook for… what was it, $3B CAD?
If you’re talking specifically about Australia, I don’t know of comparable cases there, but their employment standards (legally speaking) are way beyond what American culture can tolerate at this point in its development. How well those standards are enforced in the “informal economy” is another question, but you’re not going to see much of that economy showing up in official statistics.
Now remember kiddies, SMCP is some liberal left wing rag as I was once told in des boards. /s
You’ve come full circle to argue against yourself.
Not saying racism doesnt exist in the US and still work to be done, but in comparison to who, which country doesn’t? What countries are doing such a stellar job vs the US when it comes to racism? In all my travels London was the only place that came close, maybe Sydney also. I can’t speak for the level of racism outside of these two capital cities. I’d like to find out from the minorities and immigrants there first hand and see some stats and compare laws, opportunities and success of the immigrants and integration into society at all levels of influence and power.
Yes agreed with most of what you said, Taiwan just has a lot of work to do when it comes to treatment of SE Asians, extreme levels of racism there and how they see people with darker skin when they talk amongst each other. Most of the time they won’t say it to a foreigner
500 instances in California and Texas (I think). Racial element to accusation. States with a history of astronomical jury awards and where the population believes in the wage gap numbers uncritically? If one of these claims had actual merit, a 2.9 million dollar settlement could happen. Not to mention the bad publicity during the trial and the testimony, for both the sub and the parent. What is the standard of knowledge for whatever law they are accused of violating? What about intent? Any catch-alls?
The company focuses on business as a government contractor. Fighting the government over a claim like this while trying to win bids could be incredibly damaging.
This money is so low that it makes me more inclined to believe that Dell is telling the truth that there is no evidence of discrimination (other than aggregated income broken out by different groups).
What I said earlier:
And later:
You could argue that the funeral counts as anecdotal evidence of racism, but I take it as anecdotal evidence of the perception of racism, not of racism itself.
Consider the phenomenon, noted years ago, of immigrants in the US being more reluctant to co-operate with police investigations than the general population. There are explanations other than racism: they come from countries where the police have worse reputations than in the US and/or guilt by association is more of a thing, they have different cultural standards of involvement in other people’s affairs, they’re afraid of inadvertently outing the illegal immigrants among them, they think talking to the police about something that happened in their own community is “airing the dirty laundry in public” and thus bad for them all, and/or they don’t understand how the system works and assume there will be translation problems etc. Of course, there may also be racism in the police force, but reasonable people may think there is even if there isn’t and/or that there’s more than there really is.
You make it sound like it’s impossible to get a fair trial in the US. I’ll leave it at that. 
I don’t think I made it sound like that at all. I think I made it sound like $5.8k a person for a claim that kills you in the press, degrades your reputation, hurts your chances at government contracts, and even if you win at trial you’ve lost far more money than that is a steal and does not indicate guilt at all. The fact that the government allowed them to still say they are innocent and accepted such a small amount per claim says a lot to me.
I largely agree with your points, I only take issue with your statement about “nothing in the article to support the racism claim”, which you’ve waffled on and seem to be drawing distinctions which don’t really matter just to defend a sentence which was just worded too strongly. It doesn’t diminish the point to just acknowledge it and move on.
Lawyers and judges are expected to have a high standard of knowledge of the law. A large business can afford good lawyers. The judge is supposed to instruct the jury to reach a verdict according the law, not personal bias. It doesn’t always work, but I’m inclined to think usually it does.
If it were easy to claim gender discrimination and cash in, more people would do it.
Would you be satisfied with the wording no real support or no substantive support for the claim?
1 Like
The latter seems most accurate.