Author Topic: Employment Equity in the CAF ( merged )  (Read 51174 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Torlyn

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 210
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 530
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #50 on: November 17, 2004, 19:39:22 »

In terms past injustices, I think it is hard to overlook present discrimination in the workplace when, for example, a woman earns 75 cents on every dollar a man makes.  The basis for this disparity it certainly not based on gender superiority, but instead, a history and presence of gender discrimination.


Ah, you may want to re-check that statistic...  I agree with the .75-1 ratio, however you are forgetting something very important, and that is that us males don't get pregnant.  When you are taking 9 months time of work (that's the average mat leave in the federal government, probably different private sector, don't have stats on that, however), whether it be through a leave of absence, maternity leave, sick leave, whatever, you cease being eligible for raises or promotions during that time.

We had one lady where I used to work that raised a human rights complaint against the company because she got overlooked for promotions and raises during a 3- year period, during which she had taken 24 months of maternity leave.  She claimed that as she had still been an employee for 3 years, she should be father along both the promotion & salary scale than 2 people who were hired at the same time.  (1 of which was a female, had no kids, and was farther along than the guy, but that's another story)  God bless her for having children, and I'm glad that our company topped up her mat leave pay to equal her working salary, but it is fair that she should a raise/promotion during that time when she's only been present at work 33% of that time period?  Her complaint was tossed, BTW.

I am not trying to totally refute your statement, nor am I saying that such sexism doesn't exist, but it's not always that cut and dry.

T

Offline Inch

  • Signal Charlie Goodtimes
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • -395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,231
  • CH124 Driver
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #51 on: November 17, 2004, 19:43:40 »
As for the "best/fastest/fittest/most qualified/etc." getting the job...of course this is the aim of all persons, most certainly the Canadian Forces.   But are you suggesting that all caucasian persons hired in the past have been superior candidates to visible minorities, because that is the only reasoning that could account for the present discrepencies in most white collar and professional fields.   Playing devil's advocate, if this were the case and in all instances the caucasian candidates were superior, one would have to ask themselves why...and after doing so, would it not seem reasonable to try and eliminate any discriminatory factors that were directly corrolated to this inequality.

No, the reason there are more Caucasians in all jobs is the law of probability. Here's the stats according to Stats Canada from the 2001 Census:
Total population 29,639,035
Total visible minority population 3,983,845

So if 13% of the population are visible minorities, why should the percentage of minorities in jobs be any different than the society as a whole? We're talking about 1-2 people out of 10 that are not Caucasian. A little over 2% are Black for instance, so why would it surprise you that there aren't more Blacks in the military when they only account for 1 in 50 in all of Canada?

The law of probability holds true even at the Olympics, the USA is about 10 times the size of our country, is it any surprise that they win more medals than we do? They have a larger pool to choose from.   The same can be said with visible minorities versus the Caucasian majority.

So to answer your question, yes, the odds are that someone in the other 87% of the country is faster/bigger/more qualified to do the job than someone in the 13% visible minority. That's just the way it works.

I believe in equal opportunity for everyone and special treatment for no one regardless of race, period.
You sir are a moron!
A Mormon? But I'm from Earth.

Online Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 178,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,352
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #52 on: November 17, 2004, 20:14:10 »
As far as Noam Chomsky goes...I didn't know he wrote on affirmative action.

No, he didn't.   I'm referring to that tendency of some Westerners to commit acts of self-flagellation due to the fact that in the game of civilization, we've ended up on top of the heap for now.

Quote
In terms past injustices, I think it is hard to overlook present discrimination in the workplace when, for example, a woman earns 75 cents on every dollar a man makes.   The basis for this disparity it certainly not based on gender superiority, but instead, a history and presence of gender discrimination.

Torlyn was spot on with the statistics and the sad personal example of the culture of entitlement.   I've seen other statistics that have shown that the reason for the lower income of woman is skewed by the fact that a greater amount of woman work part-time while raising a family.

The point is that for every statistic, there is a counter-statistic.   The fact remains that "affirmative action" and "reverse discrimination" are counter-intuitive to the notion of an equal citizenry that is judged on merit and ability.

Consider as well that 1/3 of the entire population of Canada lives in Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto - which also happen to be where immigrants will flock towards.   Silly ideas on the workforce of Grand Prairie, Alberta being a mirror image of the Canadian population are out to lunch as they take no account of the distribution of population and the geography of Canada.

Quote
As for history, in which you decided to use an episode two thousand years ago as opposed to a more recent and therefore relevant citation, "The Romans burned the village of my ancestors down in Gaul, I demand retribution from the Italian Government!!!", if we dont hold anyone accountable for the actions of the past, how can we expect anyone to behave any differently in the future.

So, what's the time frame for "atonement" then?

Should the American Government be forced to pay out Africans for slavery (which African tribes, selling their enemies, were equally complicit in)?

Should the Canadian Government be forced to give rights to Natives because we essentially displaced them, just as they had been doing to eachother before the "Fourth Wave" of people (Europeans) moved to the Americas?

Should we be forced to pay restitution to the Japanese for the unfair treatment and internment they received at the hands of our great-grandfathers?

What is the "statute of limitation" then?   I'm interested to here if one has been decided on, or if you arbitrarily decided who is oppressed and who isn't.

Quote
Miss Hardie, I don't think anyone is a winner in the aftermath of oppression, but that's not to say they are not benefactors. As for two wrongs don't make a right, this is a compelling claim; however, the affirmative action I mentioned above is hardly a 'wrong' in attempting to even the playing field. In addition, to use a contemporary example but at the same time not to try and deviate from the topic at hand, if two wrongs dont make a right, then how can persons on this board justify ousting a violent tyrannt who murdered countless civilians, by using means that have resulted in the deaths of over 100,000 civilians...seems analogous...I'd be interested to hear your view...

"since you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."

Thucydides
« Last Edit: November 17, 2004, 20:19:49 by Infanteer »
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline MissHardie

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 40
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 51
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #53 on: November 17, 2004, 20:31:30 »
EDIT: repeats much of what Infanteer said; he got this thoughts out quicker than I.

CivU,

â Å“if we dont hold anyone accountable for the actions of the past, how can we expect anyone to behave any differently in the future.â ?

This statement cuts both ways. If those people we are claiming to 'undiscriminate' get used to all the anti-discrimination efforts, who's to say they'll ever stand on their own feet?  The human being is always drawn to the easiest choice. 

Furthermore, how long should 'we' be held responsible for past actions? A lifetime? Since the inception of our nation? Since we colonized? How can we adequately rectify past wrongs when those who produced what we now view as wrong and immoral actions were only doing what their society dictated as right?  For example, how would one go about recompensing those descendants of slaves? Is their national government responsible? Or are those African tribes who captured their ancestors and sold them into slavery responsible? Or maybe the European merchants who transported them from Africa to the New World? Who is to be held accountable? Should anyone be held accountable? How could be possibly make a difference in helping make better the life of one who was once a slave when they're all dead?

Not all wrongs can be made right.  Actually, I'd argue that no wrongs can totally be made right and the ensuing actions to rectify the situation are all attempts at the impossible â “ to make as if the wrong never occurred.  Such is life â “ as Hobbes wrote, it is brutal, hard and short.

What's wrong with assimilation?  Granted, immigrants should keep their culture to make Canada a richer place, but in moving to Canada they also imply they want to adopt the Canadian lifestyle and values as well to earn all the Canadian benefits. (Then again, what are the Canadian values?... But that's a topic for another thread.)

I'm interested to know why you're in the military if you don't believe that violence can solve international problems.  People die in armed conflicts, combatants and non-combatants alike.  It's a function of war and the assorted dangerous and life-threatening activities that occur in the locale where the fighting is.  War is a messy business; no one can predict when a civilian is going to start fighting back, or just be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Granted, I think the Bush administration could have given much better reasons to the international community for going to war, but how can you say that leaving the Iraqi civilians to a future of terror, torture and oppression is better than a bloody regime change with plans to implement a free political organization?  I'd like to see where you drew the number of 100,000 civilian deaths.  Sources? Feel free to send me a whole pile; I will actually check them.  And no, I'm not being sarcastic or trying to be offensive; I've just not seen that number bounced around by any credible news source â “ perhaps I've been lax in reading my news.

As for the analogous comment: how is engaging in a practice that will undoubtedly kill your citizens as well as those of the enemy in pursuit of a political goal analogous to giving grants or opportunities to 'disadvantaged citizens' (gotta love PC) to better their lives â “ at the expense of others, it seems? 

Anyway, I think I just bored everyone to tears with that little diatribe, so I'll finish that particular train of thought.

I think the Noam Chomsky reference made was statement made to imply that you, based on your posts and your wordings, follow the type of logic that condemns George Bush Jr. as a war criminal.  Just my thoughts, though.  Is your major sociology?

NavyGrunt

  • Guest
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #54 on: November 17, 2004, 20:48:47 »
Every debt has to eventually be repaid. The notion that the repayment carry on forever is ridiculous. I have not oppressed anyone- and most(read MOST) now havent been oppressed in Canada. So why would they continue to be repaid? We are creating a system that will eventually create a bigger problem of entire cultures reliant on handouts.

If every barrier is erased and the playing field leveled then how is that discriminitory? I understand the education benifits for native people- as they and the government have created a society that is essentially unable to compete at all- because of the reliance on programs set up to pay them back for people that "oppressed them" before I was born....and my parents were born....and their parents......

Yes me must learn from the past- the past has also shown that this program isnt working properly- when will we learn from that?

You want the best person for the job period. You also want the person most interested in the job. Not just the guy whos there for the healthcare or paycheck. Is it so hard to believe that there are cultures that are not interested in certain job types? Why do we work so hard to recruit people with no interest in the job?

CivU

  • Guest
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #55 on: November 17, 2004, 21:19:48 »
Well I step out to write an exam and the responses flow in...

As far as atonement goes, it would seem obvious that we can't address all historic prejudices and the events that follow them; however, that is not to say that we should accept them and not consider how we can change our behaviour in the present so as to not reflect a lack of concern, or an inevitability of repeating themselves...This can be done by addressing issues of inequality that perpetuate one groups dominance over another as not merely "the way things are" but an issue that should be addressed and equalized.  To merely pass the buck, "for people that "oppressed them" before I was born....and my parents were born....and their parents......" is not a solution to any problem.  Is it not the RCR who say to never pass a fault? 

In terms of, "while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must".  At the expense of sounding too idealistic, with ideologues touting this message (sounds strikingly neo-con) how did Canada ever acheive a system of social safety that ensures the weak, be it the unemployed struggling for work and needing employment insurance to get by, the single mother needing social assistance, the lower class family who without socialized health care would suffer immensely or the elderly person who lives month to month off CPP, come about.

I think your attempt to promote assimilation (akin to the American melting pot) hit an impass when you failed to recognize Canada values...perhaps Canadian values are a sense of concern for inequality suggested by the above socialize methods to equalize society that many Canadians have come to rely upon in times of need, and the aspects of our country that make it an admirable nation the world over...

As for the 100,000 marker for the Iraqi death toll, considering you asked for it...consult a recently published article in The Economist (I guess you don't read what is essentially the most credible news source, not to appear sarcastic either) that discusses figured indicated in a report released by Lancet (arguably the most reputable British medical journal) entitled "Estimating the Iraq War's Death Toll".  As for my interest in the military, I hardly feel Canadian foreign policy and American foreign policy are comparable, and I support (under this government) the direction intended for the Canadian Forces.

As for Noam Chomsky...I guess it's a love-hate discourse...not unlike the opinons voiced on this site.

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,777
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #56 on: November 17, 2004, 21:42:21 »
how did Canada ever acheive a system of social safety that ensures the weak, be it the unemployed struggling for work and needing employment insurance to get by, the single mother needing social assistance, the lower class family who without socialized health care would suffer immensely or the elderly person who lives month to month off CPP, come about.

Hmmmm.  On that note .  .  .

Maybe it is not race/culture/penis size that sets the barriers to opportunities.  Maybe, just maybe, it is social class.  Are a disproportionate percentage of a given ethnic group living below a certain economic level?  Should we do something to help members of that ethnic group achieve more?  NO!  Maybe we could look at â Å“economic affirmative action.â ?  Aim to help everyone living below that certain economic level.

Affirmative action has the effect that minorities are given extra means to escape their social class.  However, the white Anglo-Saxon family can sit in that social class and that is okay.  We do not need to worry about them because they are white.

CivU,
Can you show me that Canadian born minorities have a harder/easier time of escaping their social class? 

CivU

  • Guest
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #57 on: November 17, 2004, 22:26:46 »
These are merely a selection of brief synopsis' from various scholarly sources, as you requested.  I do suggest you read them at length, as the amount of data is overwhelming and my cut and paste is essentially insulting to the work of these academics.

"We found that the ethnicity and racial factors were just as important, in line with Shevky and Bell's predictions that heritage and colour would act as boundaries to regulate access to opportunities. All three factors-class, ethnicity and race-are important reasons why some residents live near the centre or on the periphery of these urban systems."

from - Changing Boundaries: Sorting Space, Class, Ethnicity and Race in Ontario
Leo Driedger. The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology. Toronto: Dec 2003.Vol.40, Iss. 5;  pg. 593

"Our findings, which are generally consistent with the findings in earlier studies, affirm the designation of visible minorities as one of the disadvantaged groups in the Canadian labour market, but not without major qualifications. Minority immigrant men experience a significant wage disadvantage relative to white immigrant men."

from - The relative earnings of visible minorities in Canada: New evidence from the 1996 census
Robert Swidinsky, Michael Swidinsky. Relations Industrielles. Quebec: Fall 2002.Vol.57, Iss. 4;  pg. 630, 30 pgs

"Using the 1991 and 1996 Canadian census data, the present study addresses the issue of poor or low-income immigrants, a topic largely overlooked in previous immigration research. The authors found that, compared to native-born Canadians, immigrants were consistently over-represented among the poor, and that this over-representation had a clear ethnic and racial colour with visible minority immigrants experiencing the most severe conditions."

"Racial discrimination is another problem that deserves more attention. Although the findings of this study on the effect of racial discrimination are far from definitive (due to the inherent measurement limitations in the data used here), they are consistent with the findings of many previous studies and also with the trends observed in other immigrant-receiving countries. If left unchecked, the problem of race is only going to intensify."

from - The changing colour of poverty in Canada
Abdolmohammad Kazemipur, Shiva S Halli. The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology. Toronto: May 2001.Vol.38, Iss. 2;  pg. 217, 22 pgs

"Besides the income variations due to possible discrimination as implicitly suggested by Model 5, various factors also strongly influence the income differentials among ethnic groups. The difference between Model 1 and Model 5 reflects the effect of immigration status. Among the four European minorities, only the Polish group is in a disadvantaged position due to its composition in age at and period of immigration, as indicated by the fact that its income level increases after controlling for this variable (from - 389 to +781). Meanwhile, immigration status is detrimental to the income level of all the visible minorities, with recency of immigration depressing their earnings."

from - The integration of visible minorities in contemporary Canadian society
Hou Feng, Balakrishnan, TR. Canadian Journal of Sociology. Summer 1996.Vol.21, Iss. 3;  pg. 307

If you wish to have me cite any more scholarly documentation on the matter please ask.  I have access to plenty of material as it is well within my stream of study.

As far as, "Affirmative action has the effect that minorities are given extra means to escape their social class.  However, the white Anglo-Saxon family can sit in that social class and that is okay.  We do not need to worry about them because they are white." The above mentioned articles address the ability for non-visible minorities to more easily move out of class defined conditions of socio-economic inequality.

 






 




Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,777
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #58 on: November 17, 2004, 22:40:43 »
The above mentioned articles address the ability for non-visible minorities to more easily move out of class defined conditions of socio-economic inequality.
Not in any of your quotes.   They talk of immigrants, not of Canadian born citizens escaping their social classes.   One quote adds that â Å“findings of this study on the effect of racial discrimination are far from definitive.â ?   Your quotes talk of ethnic minorities being traditionally disadvantaged, but do not state that this advantage is unlinked from those minorities traditionally starting from lower economic classes.   In fact nothing you have shown presents a comparison between minorities and â Å“non-minoritiesâ ? of Canadian birth within the same social class.

Btw: I am generally unimpressed by quotes even from scholarly articles.   Present me with the arguments and present me with facts.   Obviously you've read, understood, and agreed with these arguments.   So argue them.   Don't just give other people's conclusions.

Online Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 178,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,352
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #59 on: November 17, 2004, 22:45:33 »
As far as atonement goes, it would seem obvious that we can't address all historic prejudices and the events that follow them; however, that is not to say that we should accept them and not consider how we can change our behaviour in the present so as to not reflect a lack of concern, or an inevitability of repeating themselves...

Yeah, we did that; it's called the Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Quote
This can be done by addressing issues of inequality that perpetuate one groups dominance over another as not merely "the way things are" but an issue that should be addressed and equalized.

The crux of the matter is who is being oppressed?   You sure love to use that term, but I fail to see what relevance the term and all the whimsical spin-offs you've derived from it has to reality.

Are Natives oppressed?   They can walk off the reservation anytime they want and there is a plethora of programs to assist them (not at the expense of others) in entering the information age economy (we've both agreed that those programs are good).

Are Woman oppressed?   I don't think my mother (Margaret Thatcher's got nothing on her) would think so.

Are Minorities oppressed?   There is a reason people come to this country from around the world as opposed to leaving it.

So who really is it that the big bad white man is oppressing anyways?

Quote
To merely pass the buck, "for people that "oppressed them" before I was born....and my parents were born....and their parents......" is not a solution to any problem. Is it not the RCR who say to never pass a fault?

Neither is the self-flagellation of our society because we, in the past, didn't follow the golden rule.

Quote
In terms of, "while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must". At the expense of sounding too idealistic, with ideologues touting this message (sounds strikingly neo-con) how did Canada ever achieve a system of social safety that ensures the weak, be it the unemployed struggling for work and needing employment insurance to get by, the single mother needing social assistance, the lower class family who without socialized health care would suffer immensely or the elderly person who lives month to month off CPP, come about.

I am not to sure one could classify Thucydides as a neo-con.

It was in reference to the Iraq analogy you attempted to draw out.   Comparing the clash of societies to relations between the Canadian government and it's citizenry is apples and oranges.

Quote
I think your attempt to promote assimilation (akin to the American melting pot) hit an impass when you failed to recognize Canada values...perhaps Canadian values are a sense of concern for inequality suggested by the above socialize methods to equalize society that many Canadians have come to rely upon in times of need, and the aspects of our country that make it an admirable nation the world over...

Are you sure about that.   Like she said, that is a topic for another thread, but I think you're making a broad assumption in assuming that socialism is an "Canadian value" and that it is "admired the world over".

Quote
As for the 100,000 marker for the Iraqi death toll, considering you asked for it...consult a recently published article in The Economist (I guess you don't read what is essentially the most credible news source, not to appear sarcastic either) that discusses figured indicated in a report released by Lancet (arguably the most reputable British medical journal) entitled "Estimating the Iraq War's Death Toll".

Like any statistic that is hot off the presses, it should be taken with a grain of salt.   Looking at the article, it says that:

"The centre of its estimated range of death tolls - the most probable number according to the data collected and the statistics used - is 100,000.   And even though the limits of that range are very wide, from 8,000 to 194,000, the study concludes with 90% certainty that more than 40,000 Iraqis have died."[/i].

Although it doesn't change the fact that many people have died, between 40,000 and 100,000 looks pretty loose to me.   Real fresh statistics like this (which was done with random sampling) aren't always a good thing to bank your reputation on, as "Prime Minister" Steven Harper found out the hard way.

Anyways, what difference does it make.   Iraq is in the middle of a civil war (catalysed by an invasion) that has been brewing for decades - of course there are going to be alot of casualties.   What do you think happens in wars?

Quote
As for my interest in the military, I hardly feel Canadian foreign policy and American foreign policy are comparable, and I support (under this government) the direction intended for the Canadian Forces.

I'd love to hear what you think that direction is, because alot of us here haven't managed to figure it out yet.


McG

"Economic Affirmative Action"

We call that Welfare, don't we?
« Last Edit: November 17, 2004, 22:48:46 by Infanteer »
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

CivU

  • Guest
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #60 on: November 17, 2004, 22:54:56 »
"Btw: I am generally unimpressed by quotes even from scholarly articles.   Present me with the arguments and present me with facts.   Obviously you've read, understood, and agreed with these arguments.   So argue them.   Don't just give other people's conclusions."

It's interesting how you place the onus on someone else to prove your own hypothetical...last time I checked, that's not how an argument was presented.

â Å“findings of this study on the effect of racial discrimination are far from definitive.â ?

Of course this is the case.   Sampling can only be drawn at a certain time to reflect a particular sample population.   At what point would research be deemed definitive?   Research is still done speculating on the causes of world events dating thousands of years ago...

One quote stated, "The authors found that, compared to native-born Canadians, immigrants were consistently over-represented among the poor, and that this over-representation had a clear ethnic and racial colour with visible minority immigrants experiencing the most severe conditions."

If their experiencing the most severe conditions, then would it be easier for them to escape these conditions compared to native born Canadians (who I understand could also be visible minorities) who are not as represented in the most impoverished...

"do not state that this advantage is unlinked from those minorities traditionally starting from lower economic classes"

Why are those minorities traditionally starting from lower economic classes...?

I have presented scholarly data, you have presented little more than a weak rebuttal that overlooked an attempt at offering access (through the citations provided, which you clearly did not have the time to look further into) to material by asking me to, "Present me with the arguments and present me with facts".   I suggest you read the data provided at length and you will find both the arguments and the facts.   Furthermore, other people's conclusions are the basis for substantiating your own argumentative stance.   Without support any argument lacks merit, which brings me to my question, why don't you offer some literature supporting your claims that it is equally hard for lower class persons who are not visible minorities to rise up...

Infanteer: How did the Charter exonerate persons from accepting responsibility for their actions. In the case of Japanese-Canadians interned in Canada during the Second World War, there has been little done in the way of reciprocity, are you suggesting the Charter alleviates a need for that?





Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,777
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #61 on: November 17, 2004, 22:57:08 »
McG

"Economic Affirmative Action"

We call that Welfare, don't we?
"Social Safety Net"
""Welfare"
"Workfare"
"Canadian Millennium Fund"

yeah, it's out there now under a lot of names.

Online Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 178,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,352
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #62 on: November 17, 2004, 23:01:23 »
These are merely a selection of brief synopsis' from various scholarly sources....

I'm reading your excerpts and the only thing that really comes to my mind is

"no crap".

I don't think an academic journal article is required to tell me that immigrants are usually the poorest people in society.   Are you expecting us to roll out the red carpet for them or something?   My Grandfather moved here from Europe and he didn't need "Intervention to breakdown barriers that were set up through a cycle of repression and subjugation" or however you termed it - he worked his *** off.

As well, I would challenge the assumption of a constantly poor group of immigrants.   That statistic is like the one that states that 40,000,000 Americans are without Health Care.   Sure, there are 40,000,000 without health care, but that is a number that is constantly in flux.   People get uninsured, people get insured.   Kids leave there parants coverage, kids get a job and get covered.   Same with the immigrant population.   People come to Canada and have to make their way up the social economic scale.   However, to imply that there is this seething mass of poor people who've never been given a chance to prove themselves in Canada seems a little far-fetched.

Many groups of families who immigrated here in the earlier 20th century (Many Indian and Chinese families I know come to mind) live quite comfortably and have grandchildren who are going to University to become Doctors and Lawyers.   Like any other immigrant, it takes time for them to resocialize and earn their success, but Canada is proof that people do it all the time.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

NavyGrunt

  • Guest
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #63 on: November 17, 2004, 23:03:05 »
I dont see   how putting weak candidates in positions where they are not the BEST candidate helps out anyone. thats the argument. Justify that. If a bad candidate gets a good job because he's "purple" we might as well call him the "prince of space" and give him a sceptre. They both mean the same thing. Except when we give him a position he didnt earn he can royally screw things up.....unlikle when he waives his "space sceptre" in a parade.....

CivU

  • Guest
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #64 on: November 17, 2004, 23:06:37 »
Infanteer, you left out the crux of the Lancet article from the Economist that stated, "The centre of its estimated range of death tollsâ ”the most probable number according to the data collected and the statistics usedâ ”is almost 100,000."

As far as "this seething mass of poor people", why don't you read the journal articles.   If you provide me something you took time to find, I would read it.   You have not, it doesn't give your argument much support without corroborating sources.

And to suggest the labour market in Canada when your grandfather arrived is comparable to today's conditions is narrow minded to say the least.   Today's economic conditions are drastically different than a generation ago, yet alone several.

Online Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 178,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,352
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #65 on: November 17, 2004, 23:08:00 »
Infanteer: How did the Charter exonerate persons from accepting responsibility for their actions. In the case of Japanese-Canadians interned in Canada during the Second World War, there has been little done in the way of reciprocity, are you suggesting the Charter alleviates a need for that?

You sure get your wires crossed easily, don't you.   Follow the argument.

You stated that we need to "consider how we can change our behaviour in the present so as to not reflect a lack of concern, or an inevitability of repeating themselves".   

I stated that an entrenchment of political equality, the Charter, was that consideration.   I don't know where Japanese internment comes into play....
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

CivU

  • Guest
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #66 on: November 17, 2004, 23:14:32 »
Japanese internment seemed a relevant historic example for the issue of not accepting recent lapses in morality that remain to be given due restitution.  Only in 1988 did Brian Mulroney offer an apology:

"I know that I speak for Members on all sides of the House today in offering to Japanese Canadians the formal and sincere apology of this Parliament for those past injustices against them, against their families, against their heritage, and our solemn commitment and undertaking to Canadians of every origin that such violations will never again in this country be countenanced or repeated." â “ Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, House of Commons, September 22, 1988."

It is widely acknowledged that the treatment of Japanese Canadians in Canada was worse than the treatment of Japanese in the United States at the same time...

Online Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 178,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,352
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #67 on: November 17, 2004, 23:23:39 »
Infanteer, you left out the crux of the Lancet article from the Economist that stated, "The centre of its estimated range of death tollsâ ”the most probable number according to the data collected and the statistics usedâ ”is almost 100,000."

I said take the figure with a grain of salt with a grain of salt.   90% for 40,000 and almost certain at 100,000 means a lot of room for error.

Quote
As far as "this seething mass of poor people", why don't you read the journal articles.   If you provide me something you took time to find, I would read it.   You have not, it doesn't give your argument much support without corroborating sources.

Well, to be honest, I have better things to do then to read sociology journals to tell me "immigrants are poor" due to the fact that it really is a no-brainer.   However, I can walk outside and tell you that:

A) Canadians do not "oppress" each other.

B) Immigrants are not "exploited and subjugated".

C) Canada is not an enduring hegemony of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant.

Quote
And to suggest the labour market in Canada when your grandfather arrived is comparable to today's conditions is narrow minded to say the least.   Today's economic conditions are drastically different than a generation ago, yet alone several.

I don't know what things are like in Kingston, but from where I'm standing, people are doing the same thing they were doing a generation ago.   Things don't change much in a resource based economy.

Anyways, that's besides the point.   What are you trying to tell me, that there is no more entry level jobs for people to start at?

It is widely acknowledged that the treatment of Japanese Canadians in Canada was worse than the treatment of Japanese in the United States at the same time...

It is also widely acknowledged that the brutality of the Japanese was on par with Nazi atrocites.   Should we still hound them about that - do you want them to come and build a road for us or something?

Total War is a *****, accept it and move on.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,777
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #68 on: November 17, 2004, 23:24:31 »
It's interesting how you place the onus on someone else to prove your own hypothetical...last time I checked, that's not how an argument was presented.
I could say that of you.   You have claimed that minorities are systemically held to their social class and need special doors opened only for them if they are to get out of that situation.   The general proof of this is that more minorities live in the lower social classes.   I've called BS on these claims you have made and you have not proven your claims.   

We have checks in place that ensure everyone is treated equally.   Prove that we (as a society) are violating or own rules on a scale that would systemically repress minority advancement in the social classes.

You have identified that a disproportionate number of minorities are in lower social classes and that they are remaining in those classes because of their ethnic/cultural/other status.   Prove it (and to prove that the stagnation is systemic & due to minority status, you would have to be able to show that non-minorities are not experiencing this same stagnation).


One quote stated, "The authors found that, compared to native-born Canadians, immigrants were consistently over-represented among the poor, and that this over-representation had a clear ethnic and racial colour with visible minority immigrants experiencing the most severe conditions."

If their experiencing the most severe conditions, then would it be easier for them to escape these conditions compared to native born Canadians (who I understand could also be visible minorities) who are not as represented in the most impoverished...
Immigrants do not provide a good litmus test of Canadian born citizens' opportunities & barriers.   You would not be able to look at them to model movements through Canadian social classes.

Furthermore, other people's conclusions are the basis for substantiating your own argumentative stance.   
Funny thing about scholarly works, they never just quote other works.   They also summarize arguments and facts that allow conclusions to be drawn.   They state the nature of studies done.   Funny thing about undergrad assignments, they would get a Fail if they did not provide more than quotes.

So, to summarize:

1)   It is you who has not proven an argument.

2) You made one long post full of quotes that, while not hurting your case, added no value to your arguments.

CivU

  • Guest
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #69 on: November 17, 2004, 23:40:28 »
McG, I provided the articles and offered to provide more once you exhausted those...your responses are frank but dont offer any insight into the situation you are trying to address.  I don't understand how you entertain discourse with persons, is it merely a "Prove it...I said prove it...I said prove it" knee jerk reaction as they offer you something to read, consider and evaluate for yourself...

"Funny thing about scholarly works, they never just quote other works.  They also summarize arguments and facts that allow conclusions to be drawn.  They state the nature of studies done.  Funny thing about undergrad assignments, they would get a Fail if they did not provide more than quotes."

It seems your relating scholarly works to undergrad works? All I can state to this effect is that yes, undergrad assignments do require you to provide more than quotes, in fact, they are basically a summary of others works to come to a conclusion determined by and argued by the student in regards to the topic at hand.


Infanteer, I think your oversimplifying a complicated issue by simply using an example of, "I can walk outside and tell you that."

As for entry level jobs, much of the research done shows that many immigrants remain in those positions depsite being qualified in many professional fields.  In BC there is presently a movement afoot for Canadian trained doctors to apprentice foreign trained doctors, as there are many who are not employed despite being qualified and Canada having a lack of physicians.

As far as Japanese internment, I was referring to Japanese Canadians in Canada who were interned, while at the same time Italian or German Canadians were not interned.  Not only is Total War a horrid thing, but so too was the paralleling Race War of WWII's Pacific Campaign.

If you want to read more about it, I suggest:
Race War!: White Surpremacy and the Japanese Attack on the British
by Gerald Horne (Author)
http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0814736408/qid=1100752717/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/702-3345160-1008840



Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,777
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #70 on: November 17, 2004, 23:51:02 »
your responses are frank but dont offer any insight into the situation you are trying to address.
Neither do yours.

I don't understand how you entertain discourse with persons, is it merely a "Prove it...I said prove it...I said prove it" knee jerk reaction as they offer you something to read, consider and evaluate for yourself...
It is as per your observation that one prove one's own arguments.   I found some big gaps in your arguments and you don't want to close them.   Why is that?

It seems your relating scholarly works to undergrad works?
Not exactly.   I'm saying that your use of quotes did nothing to benefit your argument.   An 2nd yr poli sci could have argued better with or without quotes.

CivU

  • Guest
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #71 on: November 18, 2004, 00:01:02 »
As far as relating my use of quotes to a particular undergad program or year, the comparison seems irrelevant.  I'm not writing an essay here, I'm discussing something informally on a website...

If you don't see it fit to use quotes, or refer to larger works which I suggested reading as they cover many aspects of the present conditions of minorities in the labour market, then I'm not sure how to support an argument.  Without referring to something concrete your just speculating, that may work on a web site but not in the real world...

As for my discussion being devoid of insight, I guess thats a matter of opinon.  Providing sources, quotes and referring to instances, whether other persons agree with their representativeness or not, seems to be more of a contribution than you have made...

Online Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 178,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,352
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #72 on: November 18, 2004, 00:10:11 »
Infanteer, I think your oversimplifying a complicated issue by simply using an example of, "I can walk outside and tell you that."

And I think you're overcomplicating things by assuming that everyone who's poor will never achieve social mobility without discriminatory measures being emplaced.

As well, you're overcomplicating things by assuming that because immigrants are poor, they are oppressed and need a foot in the door.

Quote
As for entry level jobs, much of the research done shows that many immigrants remain in those positions depsite being qualified in many professional fields. In BC there is presently a movement afoot for Canadian trained doctors to apprentice foreign trained doctors, as there are many who are not employed despite being qualified and Canada having a lack of physicians.

Many of these are legitimate cases.   Canada has stringent standards for professions for a reason, and we cannot assume that foreign training will meet Canadian requirements.   Anyways, there is nothing wrong with programs to upgrade the training of immigrants.

Now, are these doctors and engineers eternally damned to a life of poverty and driving taxis?   Look at a university campus in Canada - probably not.

Quote
As far as Japanese internment, I was referring to Japanese Canadians in Canada who were interned, while at the same time Italian or German Canadians were not interned.

Yup.   So we're racists; as I said in another thread, inclusive fitness is an innate process in our psyche.   I am not trying to defend the policy, just pointing out that other societies are equally unjust and that it is part of the way the world works.

Quote
Not only is Total War a horrid thing, but so too was the paralleling Race War of WWII's Pacific Campaign.

Umm...the Pacific War, with all its racial undertones (Shido Minzoku, "Yellow Fever") was the Total War I was referring to.

It wasn't the first and it won't be the last.

Quote
If you want to read more about it, I suggest:
Race War!: White Surpremacy and the Japanese Attack on the British
by Gerald Horne (Author)

Looking through the reviews....

The Japanese were poor targets of a shift in American racial hatred?

The Chinese appreciated the Japanese "Liberation" of the mainland from European Hegemony?

Race was the primary driver of war in the Pacific?   (Sorry, black and white arguments almost always collapse)

No thanks, revisionist history is not really my forte.

Unless one is a complete moron, no one paints the Pacific War as a rosy clash of good vs evil.   As well, the deep flaws in the civil society of the United States are universally recognized (C'mon, we all watched Hart's War).

Is there anything special you're trying to tell me here.   Was this war any different then the Eastern Front?   Or how about the Crusades?   Or how about Cortes?   I could go on here, but what I'm getting at is that applying our "lofty" moral standards of today to historical events isn't going to help much.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2004, 00:15:02 by Infanteer »
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,460
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,777
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #73 on: November 18, 2004, 00:15:16 »
If you cannot summarize the facts & arguments from the works you have read, then it leads me to believe that you are not convinced by the substance of those articles.

Lets face it, we cannot argue quotes.   I can post quotes, you can post quotes, Infanteer can post quotes.   But if we don't get down to arguing substance, we have not really had a discussion.   To present quotes, state and opinion, and say "go read the books" does not constitute an argument.

CivU

  • Guest
Re: Affirmative Action recruiting policies?[split from RMC thread]
« Reply #74 on: November 18, 2004, 00:22:16 »
"Many of these are legitimate cases.   Canada has stringent standards for professions for a reason, and we cannot assume that foreign training will meet Canadian requirements.   Anyways, there is nothing wrong with programs to upgrade the training of immigrants.

Now, are these doctors and engineers eternally damned to a life of poverty and driving taxis?   Look at a university campus in Canada - probably not."

and...

"Yup.   So we're rascists; as I said in another thread, inclusive fitness is an innate process in our psyche.   I am not trying to defend the policy, just pointing out that other societies are equally unjust and that it is part of the way the world works."


Infanteer, I'm beginning to think we may not be so far off on a lot of things...I agree training has to be stringent and that programs to elevate existing standards are neccessary, and also that we can't defend that policy, but that also isn't to say we aren't alone...

In saying that, while I dont believe everyone who is poor will never acheive social mobility...I do believe particular groups are more hindered in their attempts systemically.   These barriers are necessary to break down if we are to acheive the kind of equality supported by the Charter.   As well, I do believe some persons are oppressed and that assistance in alleviating such forces would lead to a more productive society based on equality, which is hardly an undesirable concept...

Regardless of oversimplifying or overcomplicating, the point I've been trying to make is that barriers do exist to certain groups that need to be addressed by programs that identify the causes, attempt to eliminate them, and do so not at the expense of merited persons...If an individual has attained a position through merit, they should not lose it, but if a person has attained a position through networks that have fostered inequalities and not based on merit, then their position will most certainly be in jeopardy to merited persons put on an equal footing...

McG, it would be insulting to try and summarize a scholarly work of great depth in an informal setting such as this. What is more prudent is to cite the article so that you can access it.  If you provide citations I will review them myself.  The quotes were an attempt to partially introduce the direction (they came from abstracts) so as to provide a stepping stone to documents you might be interested in.  If you feel it's not worth your time to read the relevant literature, how can you participate in a legitimate discussion...