- Joined
- Jan 23, 2015
- Messages
- 60,604
- Reaction score
- 30,083
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Yep. But recognizing that at times diversity is necessary to accurately represent the a population isn’t holding that one race is superior.
For example, some of my clinics are in areas with high Hispanic populations. Certainly doctors of different races work in those clinics but it makes sense for me to try to hire at least some Hispanic doctors for those areas as they generally know the language and culture better. Which means better care for my patients and a competitive edge over my competitors that don’t have Hispanic doctors.
So practicality in a business sense. But that's different than the idea that effective representation must be based on a "mirror" of the population at large. Your doctors aren't "representing" the population.
I notice in your example you spend a lot of effort explaining the superiority of Hispanic doctors, even as you deny that being the basis of hiring them.
And not only does having Hispanic doctors directly help patients but indirectly helps the other doctors as well as the Hispanic doctors can help other doctors gain insight into the language and culture helping them provide better care.
A diverse culture makes for a more profitable clinic.
The same if you want a Supreme Court that can represent the people of a diverse nation such as America. A black woman , or Asian man or whatever has a different experience with the law and law enforcement and it’s effects etc than say a white male.
You're stereotyping.
If you want a truly free and representative government then you need to have institutions that can represent accurately the people they represent.
So where's the Asian on the Supreme Court?
See above.
It was an effort to make government be more representative of its population.
That sounds like political expediency. Why can't a black person represent white people?