we already have that @RichardPD

if anything at all minority students (non-white) have been getting preferential treatment in education. There is no systemic racial bias being practiced - and if someone does demonstrate racial bias in hiring employees, promoting employees, paying employees they are likely to be charged with a crime, pay high legal fees, and pay a lot of money in damages to their "victim" - Get the credentials, become proficient and productive, put in the hours, be a productive and professional employee and you'll be compensated equally with other people of same quality regardless your sex, color, creed etc.@RichardPD

there are as many "biases" as there are people. that does not create a societal condition of "systemic racial bias". Muslim/Islam is NOT a race. It is a political system designed to look like a religion and while there is a lot of expressed dislike and distrust of Islam here on IDW and everywhere really I have yet to see anything said that cannot be supported by factual and historical evidence. Furthermore 99% of dialogue and content is really opinionated content and you have to tolerate opinions you do not like just like myself and everyone else if we are to have true liberty. True liberty can ONLY exist in an environment where the free exchange of ideas exists. If you see commentary with which you disagree and are moved to challenge it then by all means do so. @RichardPD

some people suspect unfair bias and discrimination in almost every aspect of structured society - doesn't make it so. your feelings and fears do not validate your argument. @RichardPD

absolutely true - I didn't mean to imply that none exists so much as I was arguing that none is "systemicly suborned by law and policy". As I said in my opening remark above - there are as many "biases" as there are people.

I'm all for hiring and paying and recruiting all based upon merit. However to state that they administer a written exam to applicants for civil service does not ensure merit based hiring. As long as the written application forms keep questions related to the applicants race and sex you know the process in NOT solely based upon merit. @RichardPD

if you say so. believe me there are ways for the civil service to know who it is that is applying for the jobs. you are kidding yourself if you believe otherwise.@RichardPD

yes but I do not believe you were of the idea that said bias was or would be favorable to "minority" or "protected" class applicants and against any applicants who are not members of those groups. LOL! @RichardPD

yes - I do think any bias in administrating and Administration of tests will be and or is anti-White, anti-White male, anti-White heterosexual (cis?) male. @RichardPD

do you live in united states?@RichardPD

I thought so. Here in USA if you were to walk into any gov't offices you would observe the staffing is at least 50% Black and most of those are female. Then of course there are a lot of Hispanic (again mostly female) staff as well. Here in USA the Black population is about 13% of the total USA. I'm not sure the numbers for Hispanic. So there is obviously a priority on hiring minority people for civil service jobs. Obviously I have no way to know how "minorities" in GB are represented in civil service jobs. @RichardPD

@RichardPD, hahaha, I'm sure.

@RichardPD, apologies, but there's almost no way you couldn't have heard of this idea if you're anywhere in western society. Oh look! You are in a western country. Is there a particular word I used that's hanging you up?

@RichardPD, I'm not sure which part of that isn't self-explanatory. Social justice was hijacked for political power, enforced through the weaponization of political correctness and identity politics. Social justice is a thing, but it's something that got pushed into the background for a different political agenda.

@RichardPD, 24 hour news cycles were created by mainstream news organizations to report on each of 12 black people shot in the USA by police over a period of several years. The 'narrative' was police are targeting blacks for execution. Stirred up a lot of people and even led to some retaliation deaths. BUT, the story was demonstrably UNtrue. A couple of things motivated the narrative, 1) clicks equals money, and racism sells, 2) the weaponized version of pc/ identity politics--the stories were told in only one possible interpretation, and 3) a real social justice element (appropriated by the first two). SO, social justice is a good thing to do. Appropriating social justice to create a narrative that leads people to believe something that is false is a bad thing to do. Irresponsibly playing into that false narrative so you make money and without considering the ramifications is a bad thing to do. Social justice was weaponized for money, political power in reinforcing a marginalization narrative that was false, and control--bludgeoning the opposition party and claim it's their fault, as well as feed a narrative for your base of believers in order to cement your activism. It's quite insidious. Some of it ill-considered, some of it evil.

@RichardPD, first Vox is a shit source. And, I'm not going to do all of the work and have you come back with 4 words and a link to some idiot source. Go look at ALL of the sources. Go find your own truth. So, unless you have something substance, I'm done.