The NEED to keep ("unconscious") bigotry OUT of governance

I have posted on this topic previously - see the list of posts at the end of this post.  

The trigger for this post, the latest in a long series on this theme, is the following: 

• “Three in four people have an implicit negative bias against Indigenous Australians, study finds”   https://amp.abc.net.au/article/12335184  

While this is appalling, it does reflect my experience of Australians - including before the recent Voice  referendum. I am thinking, in particular, of some of the blatant, utterly unwarranted white supremacist abuses dished out to kids who looked like they were Aboriginal or Islander at the high school I went to in central Queensland - which, coincidentally, is where a “No” apologist on LinkedIn is from (and is attacking the measures Victorians support as “divisive” ... which means contrary to the comfortable white supremacist situation that person is used to ... ). 

So ... that may be the deplorable and unacceptable reality, but what is also reality is that democracy is meant to be for everyone - and that means making what is often termed “reasonable accommodations”, as well as ensuring inequity is not so severe it will cause dysfunction and/or violence - possibly even including successful or attempted revolutions. 

Even Cicero set a limit on inequity back in the ancient Roman Empire - which has now well and truly been broken in “modern Western” society.

In the case of Indigenous people, the numbers are too small for attempts at violence to work, and most don’t want that in any case, but, as shown by the support for Palestinians at the moment, and the fact that 40% of Australians DID want this proposal, there is considerable support, and the abuses cannot be ignored. 

That’s without looking at the fact that Australia is breaching international conventions ...

The opinion as to who and what is divisive, as the apologists for white supremacism and the leaders who rabble roused them are, in my opinion and that of many others, divisive.

They are also inevitably going to find themselves on the wrong side of history - but not until they have actively perpetuated suffering, including preventable and early deaths.

I am particularly concerned with such people who have mundane power - elected representatives, certainly (and that is where the inevitable change to progressivism is most apparent), but also authoritative organisations such as police and emergency services, and - most overlooked of all - Australia’s public service.

As I mentioned at the start of this post, I have written about this before, and there is a bunch of links below. 

The key point for this post is that people with conscious and unconscious bigotry (“bias”) do a MASSIVE amount of damage to our society. 

They have to be stopped, their ill deeds undone, and future harm prevented - for the sake of us all. 

It is that third aspect - prevention of future harm - that I wish to focus on in this post (and this has all been covered in previous posts).

So on that ... what to do about it? 

Well, on the grounds that those with great power need to have great accountability, my preference is:

• test all candidates for positions with significant decision making power (including those at counters, where necessary) for all forms (including trans-/bi-/homophobia, sexism [both ways], class, as well as the obvious one of racism) of unconscious bias, and then come up with a monitored plan to manage their problems.
  The details would be need to be kept private, but that would also require someone credible to assess the tests and the plan - someone like an ombusperson ... someone who would tell people who demanded to see all the details that they were being paranoid, unreasonable, and trying to stop all such tests in future, and their request would be ignored ...
  

If we keep sacking everyone with unconscious bias, there’ll be no-one left to do the work, because everyone has unconscious bias to some extent. 

The problem is the unconscious bit: make it conscious, and then it becomes potentially manageable - and doing so should be part of that position’s KPIs, of course.

I am fully aware no-one will do this, and they will cover their discomfort under excuses such as workers rights, but ... greater power needs greater accountability, and the best accountability of all is preventing such problems, and the best prevention is by addressing character flaws. 

I’ve provided some links below: the one that is particularly pertinent to this one is:   https://youtu.be/3eBN_9rMoVI?si=HJfMBoLl7KkzBYVi  

Food for thought - and maybe someone will come up with a better effective way to address the moral corruption of those with power that unconscious bigotry (“bias”). 

PS - this could be started if even just ONE candidate at an election went through this - and had a trusted, objected figure take on the role of assessing the test and plan.

Other posts of mine that are relevant to this post:

• “From the media on governance mistakes [Content Warning: discussion on suffering and self harm, links to articles on brutality and violence]”, which included an examination of the thought, emotional, and character flaws that allow despotic bureaucratic abuses to occur, and this:
  

  As Voltaire put it, back in the 1700s: 

  Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.
  

• “A YouTube video on problems with power - and ways to prevent them [Content Warning: cruelty, abuse, violence, atrocities, abuse of power/scandals, bad choices, narcissism, politics, police violence]”; 
• “On democracy/governance and disrespect (going in to discrimination ... )”, which includes “Perhaps the biggest indication of poor governance/democracy in the recent news, however, is this article, which questions why, given its known benefits to all, reducing inequality is not happening?”; 
• “It is IMPOSSIBLE to be professional while one has unconscious bias”; 
• “Social connection: a block to getting rid of discrimination - still?”; 
• “The COWARDICE of thoughtless authoritarian thugs”; 
• “It's machine learning, not AI”; 
• “A defence and a challenge [Content Warning: discrimination, violence, sexual assault, self harm]”, which is particularly relevant to the theme of overcoming/changing racism/white supremacism; 
• “On politicisation of the public service”; 
• “The enabling and consequences of hate and amathia - including fascism and even more extreme right wing extremism [Content Warning - anger at violent bigotry]”; 
• “Sloppy business practices: duck shoving thinking to inadequately programmed machine learning (“AI”)”; 
• “At the convenience of racists”;
• “The concerning state of Australia’s public service”; 
• “Another edited extract from an advocacy email of mine - this one on racism” which includes “Being traumatised is not a sin, crime or sign of being lacking in moral rectitude: it is a sign of being human and of having been in a traumatic situation - and it is a call for human decency and compassion. ... In that article, Australian Border Force (ABF) is reported as commenting that they cancel visas to "protect the Australian community" - and yet the racism of government bodies, rightwing media, and some Australians is causing the problem. How is eliminating a symptom of a problem addressing the problem of racism?”;
• “The (partial) cluelessness of (some) corporate advisors (1 - 2 min. read)”; 
• “Meritocracy, lack of bias, and other myths (~2,400 words; 5 - 8 minute read)”; 
• ““Fit and proper person” . . . a brief musing”; 
• “Blocking change”; 
• “Endemic, systemic racism in authorities”; 
• “New deputy police commissioners (for the state of Victoria, in Australia)”; 
• “Moving beyond lip service in human rights”.

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

• this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

• there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  
• I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.
  

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post. 

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing, and all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk.