Because you stated your definition as being societal attitude and official policy. If that is what 'The System' is, I wanted to give you an opportunity to state what you thought the official discriminatory policies are.
I said there are none and you repeated the question.
Here:
Can you elaborate on some of the official policies in Britain that you think are responsible for this?
There are none. I thought we already established that.
Anyway, let me state it once more, I don't think there any official policies are discriminatory. None whatsoever. In fact it's the opposite. There area anti-discrimination laws.
But there are discriminatory societal attitudes that hold people back. It's still there. This doesn't mean the UK is worse than other countries or that it hasn't made any progress. On the contrary.
Here is a suggestion - 'The System' in Britain is auto-correcting, introspective and self-reflexive. Societal attitudes are reformed, corrected and ameliorated through public policy, social change, and civil society.
I would agree with that.
This doesn't make any sense. I fear your laugh was wasted. I didn't say or suggest any such thing. This is just strange.
You said Black Brits of African origin are more educationally successful than Black Brits of Caribbean origin even though it's reasonable presume they both face the same level of discrimination from society (if any).
I agreed with you and mentioned another example of Jewish ad Aisan Americans who have even exceeded White Protestants in educational achievement even tough it's reasonable to presume they face more discrimination than White Protestants.
Why does that not make sense?
Oh and I wasn't laughing at you. I was agreeing with you !
Yes, I understand that is what you think. I don't entirely agree. I think there are internal structural reasons that account in large part for these differentials. You just suggested yourself in your post what some of these might be. Nevertheless, it is often comforting when competing in the Olympic games of discrimination to win the gold medal. It is tempting because it allows those who advocated for that to absolve the winners of personal responsibility, and always blame others. That can be a dangerous game though, because it doesn't address issues that need to be addressed about internal impediments to progression. That way lies stasis.
Like you, I'm not interested in a discrimination Olympics.
I'm only interested in diagnosing and acknowledging social ills. The fact that some ethnic and religious minorities excel and exceed others doesn't change the fact that racism still holds people back, some more than others.
For example, studies indicate that Jewish and Asian Americans are outdoing White Christians educationally while Blacks and in Hispanics are lagging behind.
I don't think it's fair to point out the success of Asian and Jewish Americans to play down the racism that Blacks and Hispanics face. And although I think there problems within the Black community that are partly responsible for this lag, I do think that Blacks face more racism and discrimination than Asians or Jews and that that too is a contributing factor.
Same thing can be said about the Indian and Pakistani communities in the UK. There are problems within the Pakistani communities that are responsible for higher level of unemployment and the lag in educational achievement (in comparison to the Indian community). Such problems include endogamy, isolation, high levels of social conservatism, and religiosity. But at the same time, I think Pakistanis face more discrimination than Indians and that that too is a contributing factor.
Now I can't say which factor is more responsible, the higher level of discrimination or the "self-inflicted" intra-comunity problems (so to speak). But I'm inclined to think it's more the latter.
Topic: Dutch election:Liberals take one-seat lead as far-right party grows in influence