Uneasy colours

Aarghhh, not sure why I am blogging when I should be studying. But this matter had been bothering me for quite sometime and I think I should write something down in case I forget all about it after exams.

I read some letters in the Forum section of Straits Times Interactive and came across some letters which condemned a firm responsible for security of a condominium for apparently refusing to hire Indian security guards. The firm gave "past bad experiences" as the reason and some readers were unhappy about it. I think one of them called for some equal rights and opportunities act thing (not very good at this kind of jargon lah), citing some newspaper adverts being racists by saying "applicants should know Mandarin and English" blah blah that kind of conditions.

Firstly I think some perspective is needed. When firms give that kind of conditions, granted they may be discriminating, but others might have perfectly sound reasons for putting in those clauses. For example, if my business has a lot to do with China, then of course I am going to get someone who can speak Mandarin. If I have business in India, of course I will try to find someone who can speak one of the many languages found in India. That is just pure business logic, and might not be discriminatory. To just cite such clauses out of context adds unnecessary racial tension in my opinion.

Secondly, equal opportunities blah blah that kind of stuff is good. But we must be careful not to go down the slippery road of positive discrimination.

Vieira's comments on racism

The key line is at the end of the article:

'The English have been fighting against racism for 20 years - in all departments. When I switch on my TV in England I see black journalists presenting the afternoon or evening news. In France I do not.'

I do not know anything about the situation in France and for all I know it really maybe racism at work. But what I am worried about is that people might start to campaign for positive discrimination, i.e. giving a person something simply because he is a minority, not because of merit. Last year on the train to Lisbon for Euro 2004, an ang moh English fan told me that if I were to join the England fans' club, I would be certain to get a huge fraction of tickets, simply because I am a Chinese and the FA practises positive discrimination (he said it to me in hushed tones, not sure why also, not very PC to say it perhaps?). That is something I am worried about. The last thing I want if I am a minority is to be given something because I AM a minority, and not because I deserve it on merit. Anti racism means race does not matter right? Then why should I be given something BECAUSE I am a minority? Isn't that discrimination in itself? And I think it might be even more degrading than normal racism, giving others the impression that minorities need special help to succeed.

Equal opportunities yes, positive discrimination NO.

The last thing I am concerned about is the undertone of the various letters to the forum. I think 1 of the letters to the forum today which touched on racism ended off with something to the effect of "I hope next time when India becomes an economic power Singaporeans won't be punished for their racist attitudes towards Indians now...or take their money elsewhere and not come to Singapore" blah blah.

Example:

With economic growth gathering pace in the Indian sub-continent, the day may yet come when some of the high-rollers expected to create jobs for Singaporeans in our shining integrated resorts are from the very country whose people some here now treat in such cavalier fashion.

I just hope they don't vote with their wallets and simply go elsewhere to spend their hard-earned money.

Incidentally the writer is an Indian. Somehow the inclusion of those kinds of statements dilutes the whole message. We should not be racist not because India is going to be an economic super power next time isn't it? If so then why put in statements of those kind? And the fact that the writers are Indians themselves writing those kind of statements do not reflect very well on the writers themselves. It feels like me saying we should kow tow to mainland Chinese because China is going to be an economic superpower next time, i.e. my people are going to be great next time, watch out! Even if they do not mean it, those statements dilute the important message of stamping out racism because it gives the impression that the minorities themselves are racist in the first place.

Sometimes you really wonder, who are the real racists? In my opinion, there is no difference between a white man who beats up a black guy because he is black, and the black guy who runs off crying "racism" everytime when he does not get something.