You've clearly proved the opposite, out of the many non white politicians past and present you find one that rose to a position she's held since 1997, not even a sniff of getting the party leadership after all those years. She clearly is in a minority.
It happens, to deny that it does is delusional. That said I'm not an advocate of positive discrimination either, as that's tokenism imo and avoids the core issue. It's an issue that will wane over time. It's only 60 years since a black man couldn't sit next to a white man on the bus in the States and racist 'jokes' and opinions were common place in the UK only 30/40 years ago, give it another generation and the entire subject will be a head scratcher for the young people of that time. In the meantime we have to ensure that we do all within our own individual powers to ensure that it dies with our fathers / grand fathers.
To be fair I have no idea if she was even interested/looked into party leader. Do you know if this was her main aim/goal in her career?
This is my point Tobes, I dont just want to see so called minorities in positions just to fill a quota.
... and that's problematic right there. There's a clear definition of a 'minority' , what's with the 'so called'?
http://www.theguardian.com/educatio...r-degrees-minorities-same-grades-universities Well in the main white student out perform their peers from other groups when entering with similar entry grades into university
My guess is he means inventing or perpetuating useless divisions for the sake of ******ed positive discrimination quotas. Does someone from parents with different coloured skin get a even smaller minority classification? How many generations and factors do you want to consider before ****ing off the whole thing and saying everyone is human? Or is the "clear definition" you refer to just "not white"?
So bottom line, are you saying that ethnic minorities don't get "important roles" because non ethnic minority candidates are better applicants? You make it sound black and white(no pun intended) Denying racism exists within British industry, Britain's financial sector, the health service or the Civil Service is ridiculous.
I'm not sure why job quotas has suddenly come into the discussion .. PJ raised that from nowhere so carry on amongst yourselves if you want to go down route .... I said yesterday it would be interesting to get a black posters take on the OP, some of the latest replies [not Page] scream 'white point of view'!
Where did I say it didn'/does exist? What I want to see is the most suitable people fill the roles, not quota filling
Page - do you think it's racism or just elitism? I say that only because I still believe it is hard for someone who is British and white who doesn't have the "right" background (schhooling etc) to get into the upper echelons. Obviously you could argue that it puts minorities at a disadvantage as so few of them would possess the required background so you might respond to the original question as "it's a combination of both".
There's no such thing as a 'so called minority' there either is, or there isn't. The 'human' argument is as valid as it gets but you've got your head in the sand regarding positive discrimination. Whether it's right or wrong, why do you think the need for it arose in the first place?
Because well-meaning idiots are still idiots. It's been statistically shown that by far the biggest impact is money. Poor people get ****ed in terms of everything from job opportunities to education to lifespan. Help people by closing the gap between rich and poor. That will automatically help poor minorities. Clearly a minority from a very rich family will already do much better than a poor white kid regardless of ******ed quotas.
Try telling that to black kids in the US who would never have got a chance to go to uni without it! Positive discrimination is actually unlawful in this country Why are you on about quotas?
