Good exercise in logic

I do not like the concept of photo id, but that’s basically from a libertarian perspective. I do not need to prove to anybody who I am, believing in freedom of self. As soon as somebody has the power to ask for my identity, my identify is compromised. At the same time, I do believe some element of self identification is required, if nothing else but for making sure assets, property, etc. etc. can be suitably linked to individuals. So for example, some form of identification will always be required.

That said, this was a great little argument.

In March, the Justice Department denied the Lone Star State the necessary clearance for this new law, arguing that it would disproportionately affect Hispanic voters. Texas officials appealed.  To preserve the access of all citizens to the right to vote . . . the District Court should follow the Justice Department’s lead and strike down this highly suspect and unnecessary law.

What is interesting here is the role disproportionality plays in these leftist attempts at argument.  Let's see if we can uncover the 'logic' of these arguments.

Suppose people of Italian  extraction are disproportionately affected by anti-racketeering statutes.  Would this be a good reason to oppose such laws? Obviously not.  Why not? The reason is that the law targets the criminal behavior, not the ethnicity of the criminal. If it just so happens that people of Italian extraction are 'overrepresented' in the memberships of organized crime syndicates, then of course they will be 'disproportionately affected' by anti-racketeering laws.  So what?

Indians in the USA – their racial perspectives

The fact that Indians (and yes, pretty much broad based definition of Indians) are racist is not open to debate. The national obsession towards whiter skin and the pretty much well known behaviour towards Blacks (of whatever nationality) is evident across the country. Ask any black chap to go to any place in the country and try to get rented accommodation or even walk around without being stared at. Do not get me wrong, I was four square in this category as well. Anyway, that’s not the point. An interesting question comes up, what happens when you take them out of India say to USA. If you do that, do their attitudes change? So what are the attitudes of Indian Americans or Indian immigrants towards African Americans?

Thankfully, we now have a research paper which sheds some light on this rather interesting sociological behaviour. The research picked 161 Indian immigrant and Indian American Students at a large mid western university in the USA. They were paid $10 for filling out a questionnaire which took about an hour to fill out. This sample ended with 63 Indian immigrants of an average age of 25 years and 81 Indian Americans whose average age was 20 years. Indian Immigrants were defined as people who spent their first 18 years in India. Indian Americans are those whose parents emigrated to USA and thus were born and brought up in USA. 51% male. ~$80k median parental income for Indian Americans and ~$30k for Indian immigrants. I am not going to go deeper into the methodology, that is guaranteed to send you to sleep.

So what did they find out?

1. Indian immigrants reported stronger racist attitudes towards African Americans than did Indian Americans.
2. Stronger the identification with other oppressed minorities, the more positive they felt towards African Americans
3. The beliefs about social status, social hierarchy like caste which are inculcated by Indians growing up in India is a factor in the behaviour of Indian immigrants towards African Americans
4. More contact with African Americans helped in reducing the level of racism
5. Indian immigrants do not identify with African Americans in terms of being a minority, they identify themselves more with the White majority.
6. Holding more positive attitudes toward being Indian was associated with higher levels of modern racism for Indian immigrants, but no relationship was found for Indian Americans.

Quite an interesting set of results there, Sir. Obviously the limitations of the study are pretty obvious. Small sample size in a hothouse university environment, one of the first studies, sample population not representative of overall population, inherent problems with trying to draw conclusions from such a small sample, difficulty in comparing world views of two totally different populations such as Indian immigrants and Indian Americans etc. etc.

But overall, looks like more contact with African Americans helps in reducing racism although India has a very long way to go before it can truly call itself as colour blind and non discriminatory. When people say that you can taken an Indian out of India but you cannot take India out of an Indian, looks like its true, but some of the worse elements you can take out.

Self Explanatory

Technorati Tags: racism,USA,immigration

What does it mean to be British?

I was laughing my head off reading this. Why do people want to define what it means to be British, I dont understand. I am quite happy to be just British, thank you very much. I quote:

What does it mean to be British? How do you express it in a country that believes self-promotion to be embarrassing? And how do you deal with a defining trait of the people you are trying to define: their habit of making fun of worthy government proposals?

The readers’ suggestions included “Dipso, Fatso, Bingo, Asbo, Tesco” (Asbo stands for “anti-social behavior order,” a law-enforcement tool, while Tesco is a ubiquitous supermarket chain); “Once Mighty Empire, Slightly Used”; “At Least We’re Not French”; and “We Apologize for the Inconvenience.” The winner, favored by 20.9 percent of the readers, was “No Motto Please, We’re British.”

“The point I was making is, this idea of a statement of Britishness; I cannot think of anything less British than that,” said 25-year-old David Bishop, author of the winning motto.

I dont think we can define what Britishness is, it will defeat the purpose. Where do you start? the history? the culture? the language? everything is so diffuse but still goes to make up something that is brilliant. Best I can explain is by reference to something.

Define atmosphere. Well, you can define it by the percentage of oxygen, nitrogen, other gases, etc. But the air we breathe is one of the causes of life taking form on earth. And does the definition help? no. Similarly why do you want to define being British? Just say we are and that's it! :)

Many Asians 'do not feel British'

BBC NEWS UK Many Asians 'do not feel British'

This is such a big pile of poo that this makes me sick. I shot off an email to the BBC but not sure whether they will publish this.

"This is so absolute rot.

1. Who are South Asians? I dont believe I know that country or nationality. Anybody who says I am a South Asian is a geographically challenged and illiterate person who needs to go back to school. There are nations in South Asia and countries.

2. We are all british now. Ask the number of white british people who are emigrating, that % is much higher. So this question is again extremely silly. Who is actually deciding these questions? and why is my licence fees being used for this intellectually incoherent and illogical exercise?

3. I have been a citizen of this country for years and years, and have lived in this country for about 20 years. My children are British, my pension is british, i am a highest rate taxpayer. I speak English fluently, vote regularly and complain about the NHS and the weather. I have never faced racism in this country and in fact, I think the majority of the UK are far too sensitive to colour. Stop this nonsense. "

These people are purposefully creating problems where none exist. And where there IS a problem, they hide it. I am NOT SOUTH ASIAN. I am BRITISH. I owe loyalty to this country, queen and political system. If I am going to be typified, then call me a BRITISHER of INDIAN extraction. I do NOT want to be associated with Pakistan, Afganistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh or what have you. This makes me absolutely violently sick and upset.