May 13, 2006

Seattle Schools -- Whites Cannot Be Subjects Of Racism

When it comes to being PC, you can't get better thanthe Pacific Northwest. The school district in Seattle has proven that in spades, having officially promulgated a definition of racism that EXPLICITLY excludes white student and staff from protection under policies that ban racist acts, practices, or harrassment.

Racism:

The systematic subordination of members of targeted racial groups who have relatively little social power in the United States (Blacks, Latino/as, Native Americans, and Asians), by the members of the agent racial group who have relatively more social power (Whites). The subordination is supported by the actions of individuals, cultural norms and values, and the institutional structures and practices of society.

So when your little white child is assaulted by a gang of black or Hispanic kids because he is white, it isn't an act of racism. When a white teacher is targetted for firing by a group of minority parents who shout "discrimination" because he or she has high expectations for students, it isn't an act of racism. And when a teacher calls another teacher a "cracker bitch" because of a disagreement over material to use in the following year's curriculum, it was not an act of racism.

On the other hand, a gang of white kids beating up a minority child, white parents objecting to a minority teacher, or a racial slur directed at a minority teacher are all acts of racism and will be treated as such.

I guess some animals really are more equal than others in Seattle. It is all a matter of the color of one's skin, not the content of one's character.

I wonder what federal law and the US Constitution have to say about such race-based politcies and practices? Or is "equal protection of the law" a culturally racist construct that needs to be eliminated in the name of "Equity and Race Relations".

(H/T AndrewsDad, Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler

Posted by: Greg at 04:12 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 332 words, total size 2 kb.

1 The main reason "hate crimes" statutes are a complete waste of time.

Posted by: Hube at Sun May 14 01:38:45 2006 (dNH2c)

2 In a conflict with federal law and federal court precedent, the Seattle schools deny that whites can be the victims of racism. They define racism as limited to acts against groups that have “little social power in the United States (Blacks, Latino/as, Native Americans, and Asians), by the members of the agent racial group who have relatively more social power (Whites).”

By contrast, federal appeals courts routinely rule against institutions that fire or harass white employees, recognizing that whites can indeed be victims of racism. See, e.g., Bowen v. Missouri Department of Social Services (2002) (racial harassment of white employee by black co-worker); Taxman v. Board of Education (1996) (termination of white teacher instead of black teacher). And the Supreme Court held that racial discrimination against whites by local governments is generally illegal in City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. (1989).

Affirmative action can’t be used to justify terminating or harassing an employee, although it can sometimes be used to a limited extent in hiring, promotions, and admissions.

Posted by: Hans Bader at Fri May 19 04:44:33 2006 (WMPKk)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
7kb generated in CPU 0.004, elapsed 0.0106 seconds.
21 queries taking 0.0075 seconds, 31 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]