العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
EspañolREVERSE DISCRIMINATION
(Redirected from Reverse racism)
'Reverse discrimination' is a term that is used to describe policies or acts that are seen to benefit a historically socio-politically non-dominant group (typically minorities or women), at the expense of a historically socio-politically dominant group (typically men and majority races).
For example, in India, the term is often used by the citizens protesting against reservation and quotas. In China, minorities are exempted from One Child Policy.
In the United States, it has been used in discussions of racial quotas for collegiate admission to government-run educational institutions. Such policies were held to be unconstitutional in the United States, while non-quota race preferences are legal. Harvard professor Roland Fryer, however, has argued that there is no logically tenable difference between "quotas" and "goals." [1] The term has also been used in discussions about the practice of specifically awarding government contracts to businesses owned by women or minorities.
Those challenging specific government or university policies have sought redress through the courts. Many legal cases involving claims of "reverse discrimination" are settled before they go to court. [1]
The phrase 'reverse discrimination' has been in use in the United States for several decades.
While the term is used in casual speech, most academic and expert opponents of racial or gender based affirmative action policies, such as Carl Cohen, would avoid the term "reverse discrimination" on the grounds that "discrimination is discrimination" and that the label "reverse" is a misnomer (a point that experts on both sides of issue generally agree with). Groups such as the American Civil Rights Institute, run by Ward Connerly, have opted for the more legally precise terms "race preference", "gender preference," or "preferential treatment" generally, since these terms are contained and defined within existing civil rights law, such as the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Cohen, who was a supporter of Michigan's Proposal 2 (see below), and other academics have argued that the term "affirmative action" should be defined differently than "race preference," and that while socio-economically based or anti-discrimination types of affirmative action should be permissible, those that give preference to individuals solely based on their race or gender should not be permitted. Cohen also helped find evidence in 1996 through the Freedom of Information Act that lead to the cases filed by Jennifer Gratz and Barbara Grutter against the University of Michigan for its undergraduate and law admissions policy - cases which were decided by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 23, 2003.
Ward Connerly has promoted a series of ballot initiatives to remove "preferential treatment" in the states of California (California Proposition 209 (1996)), Washington (1998 - I-200), and Michigan (the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative - MCRI, or Proposal 2, 2006). All three of these initiatives have passed. California's initiative was co-authored by academics Tom Wood and Glynn Custred in the mid-1990s and was taken up by Connerly after he was appointed in 1994 by Governor Pete Wilson to the University of California Board of Regents. Connerly plans what he calls a "Super-Tuesday" of five additional states in 2008.
'Reverse racism' is a term expressed to be the persecution of any group perceived to have power even in instances when this is a distortion of facts. Reverse Racism should be delineated from affirmative action goals. Affirmative action is a goal to conduct racist free hiring and education, and reverse racism is the active persecution of a person based on imagined power or progeny.
★ Affirmative action
★ Gender-blind
★ Race-blind
★ White privilege
★ UK Home Office Employment Targets
★ Positive action in employment under the UK Race Relations Act
★ John Rosenberg's Discriminations,
★ Tim Fay's Adversity.net,
★ Chetly Zarko's Power, Politics, & Money.
1. http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/fryer/papers/fryer_loury_jepfinal.pdf
'Reverse discrimination' is a term that is used to describe policies or acts that are seen to benefit a historically socio-politically non-dominant group (typically minorities or women), at the expense of a historically socio-politically dominant group (typically men and majority races).
For example, in India, the term is often used by the citizens protesting against reservation and quotas. In China, minorities are exempted from One Child Policy.
In the United States, it has been used in discussions of racial quotas for collegiate admission to government-run educational institutions. Such policies were held to be unconstitutional in the United States, while non-quota race preferences are legal. Harvard professor Roland Fryer, however, has argued that there is no logically tenable difference between "quotas" and "goals." [1] The term has also been used in discussions about the practice of specifically awarding government contracts to businesses owned by women or minorities.
Those challenging specific government or university policies have sought redress through the courts. Many legal cases involving claims of "reverse discrimination" are settled before they go to court. [1]
| Contents |
| Nomenclature, Usage, and Opponents of preferential treatment |
| See also |
| External links |
| References |
Nomenclature, Usage, and Opponents of preferential treatment
The phrase 'reverse discrimination' has been in use in the United States for several decades.
While the term is used in casual speech, most academic and expert opponents of racial or gender based affirmative action policies, such as Carl Cohen, would avoid the term "reverse discrimination" on the grounds that "discrimination is discrimination" and that the label "reverse" is a misnomer (a point that experts on both sides of issue generally agree with). Groups such as the American Civil Rights Institute, run by Ward Connerly, have opted for the more legally precise terms "race preference", "gender preference," or "preferential treatment" generally, since these terms are contained and defined within existing civil rights law, such as the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Cohen, who was a supporter of Michigan's Proposal 2 (see below), and other academics have argued that the term "affirmative action" should be defined differently than "race preference," and that while socio-economically based or anti-discrimination types of affirmative action should be permissible, those that give preference to individuals solely based on their race or gender should not be permitted. Cohen also helped find evidence in 1996 through the Freedom of Information Act that lead to the cases filed by Jennifer Gratz and Barbara Grutter against the University of Michigan for its undergraduate and law admissions policy - cases which were decided by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 23, 2003.
Ward Connerly has promoted a series of ballot initiatives to remove "preferential treatment" in the states of California (California Proposition 209 (1996)), Washington (1998 - I-200), and Michigan (the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative - MCRI, or Proposal 2, 2006). All three of these initiatives have passed. California's initiative was co-authored by academics Tom Wood and Glynn Custred in the mid-1990s and was taken up by Connerly after he was appointed in 1994 by Governor Pete Wilson to the University of California Board of Regents. Connerly plans what he calls a "Super-Tuesday" of five additional states in 2008.
'Reverse racism' is a term expressed to be the persecution of any group perceived to have power even in instances when this is a distortion of facts. Reverse Racism should be delineated from affirmative action goals. Affirmative action is a goal to conduct racist free hiring and education, and reverse racism is the active persecution of a person based on imagined power or progeny.
See also
★ Affirmative action
★ Gender-blind
★ Race-blind
★ White privilege
External links
★ UK Home Office Employment Targets
★ Positive action in employment under the UK Race Relations Act
★ John Rosenberg's Discriminations,
★ Tim Fay's Adversity.net,
★ Chetly Zarko's Power, Politics, & Money.
References
1. http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/fryer/papers/fryer_loury_jepfinal.pdf
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
