The Washington Post's Colbert I. King offers another convincing critique of conservative commentators who argue that racial profiling should be used as an anti-terror security mechanism in light of the 9/11 and 7/7 attacks.
King argues principally that it is hypocritical for conservatives to support racial profiling when they are generally opposed to racial preferences. For example, conservatives are against race-conscious admissions programs.
In the course of his discussion, King also points out that even if conservatives were consistent in their approach to racial classifications, developing a coherent and reliable profile would be extremely difficult:
Under racial profiling, as they would have it practiced in subways, airports, train stations, etc., individual differences among North African, Middle Eastern and South Asian young men would be ignored. These people would be labeled and profiled as possible terrorists and be reduced to an amalgamated stew closely watched by the state....
Who among us, for example, can distinguish a Muslim man from a non-Muslim man? A Saudi from a Salvadoran? A dark-brown-skinned Jamaican from a dark-brown-skinned Washingtonian? A heavy coat-wearing, backpack-toting, suicide bomber, quietly reciting religious verse, from the over-cloaked, muttering, bag-laden homeless man who takes off running at the sight of a cop?
King concludes by hypothesizing why conservatives can rally in support of racial profiling despite their views on the race in society and the clear mandates of the Constitution:
The shooting death of a Brazilian man who was thought to be of "South Asian origin" should itself indicate that profiling may have very dangerous and unfortunate consequences. In addition, Britain's Daily Mirror is reporting on the minority communities subjected to hate crimes: "Suresh Grover, of The Monitoring Group which studies race attacks, said: 'We have had calls from South Americans, Eastern Europeans, Hindus and Sikhs'" -- clearly not just Muslims, Arabs, or South Asians.How can they, of all people, argue that the government, in the name of fighting terrorism, should judge individuals differently on account of their national origin, ethnicity, religion or race? Is it because they know it won't be their ox that gets gored?
DNSI direct link 0 comments Email post:
0 Comments:
<< Home