GRSJ224/racialdiscrimination

Oluwatosin Odugbemi | 15806169

In this article, the word race is used as and defined to be a socially constructed category of identification based on historical biological affiliations.

It is important to note that the term "race" is no longer universally accepted as a preferred nomenclature, however, for ease of understanding it will be used here.

Racial discrimination refers to the treatment or consideration of a person based on their perceived racial and ethnic differences. Discrimination is commonly found when a certain group receives preferential treatment over another on the basis of racial distinguishes. The aim of this article is to explore the existence and ramifications of racial discrimination historically and contemporarily.

Etymology

The term discriminate is sourced from the early 17th century in the English language. It is from the Latin word discriminat, meaning 'distinguished between' or 'distinction'. The American Civil War (1861-1865) marked the evolution of the term "discrimination" as its usage became coupled with an understanding of the prejudicial treatment of African-Americans on the basis of race.

The word race is sourced from 16th century French. The early French word razza meant 'people of common descent.' It became problematic as people began to use it to segregate groups. Instilled in the term is a critical issue: the claim that we are all inherently limited or empowered based on our birth into a unique genetic group that contains millions of other similar people.  The term is divisive and ignores the diversity within nationalities. It is used in this article for ease of explanation and because of its predominant use in the history of topics being discussed. Race is no longer an acceptable term to use to describe groups in contemporary society non-inclusive of the discourse of academia.

Racism in Government

Discriminatory policies and laws still exist in many countries and regions, including those that look down upon mistreatment of certain groups. Countries may have racism embedded in policy due to outdated prejudicial values and practices. The very founding of the majority of developed nations were accomplished through the colonization and racialization of peoples Indigenous to those lands. White Europeans gained control over the lands of locals through the use of various methods of violence, and instilled land policy which is rooted in discrimination. The European way of life and governance was viewed as superior to that of the native locals. In this we can see how discrimination against a local groups became the central foundation of governance and nation building in the former white colonies of Canada, the United States of America, and Australia. The South African apartheid era is another example of strong official government policy that was motivated and built upon racial discrimination. Further exploration on Canada's immigration policy presents us with an example of how racism is still present in governance and finds its roots in Canada's history.

Racism in Canadian Immigration Policy

Historically, Canada has prioritized preserving white European culture whilst ensuring an adequate supply of labour from other parts of the world. Racialized immigration policies enabled the settlement of white Europeans. The overt distinguisher between "preferred" and "non-preferred" races appeared in the Head Tax, the Exclusion Act, the Continuous Passage Requirement, and the 1910 Immigration Act. These policies all sought and worked to restrict the permanent settlement of individuals from developing nations, while white European immigration was encouraged to settle the nation. This racialized immigration enabled the British and French to be the two founding nations and form a white majority race in Canada.

National liberation movements in the late 19th century caused major change in Canadian immigration policies. These movements dismantled European empires. Racialization in policy and law was challenged. The post-war economic boom caused decreased emigration from Europe changing circumstances. In response to this, Canada removed overt reference to race from immigration policy. Despite this, the language in today's immigration policy continues to have underlying tones of racialization. An example of this is the separation between economic and sociocultural value in policy. Wording of questions like "What role should immigration play in the fostering of the development of Canada's economy?"and "How does immigration affect the social and cultural life of Canada?" is marginalizing of economies and cultures. The development of Canada's economy is constantly separated from 'social' and 'cultural' benefits. These questions link social and cultural diversity with immigration, identifying immigrants as socioculturally different from the rest of Canadians. 'Cultural' diversity has come to stand for 'racial' diversity, making racism still present in immigration policy.

Statistical Repercussions

As of 2013, Indigenous Canadians make up only 4% of Canada's population, and yet they account for 23.2% of the federal prison population.

According to the Australian government's June 2006 publication of prison statistics, Aborigines make up 24% of the overall prison population in Australia.

In 2004, Māori people made up just 15% of the total population of New Zealand but 49.5% of prisoners. Māori people are entering prison at eight times the rate of non-Māori peoples.

25% of the people in prisons in England are from an ethnic minority. The Equality and Human Rights Commission found that in England and Wales, a black person was five times more likely to be imprisoned than a white person, as of 2010. The discrepancy was attributed to "decades of racial prejudice in the criminal justice system".

In the United States, racial profiling of minorities by law-enforcement officials has been identified and labelled as racial discrimination. Within the American criminal justice system, minorities are convicted and imprisoned disproportionately in comparison to other populations.