Is It Time To Remove Race From The Census??

pragmatic1 · 01-01-2012 02:33PM

No. Its important to collect as much info as possible.

keith16 · 01-01-2012 02:40PM

Gnobe wrote: »

That was the 2001 census, 10 years ago. There's been a much more liberal immigration policy implemented since. Its predicted to be around 88% this time.

Couple of things to point out, 22% of primary schoolchildren in England are not white. Ethnic minorities have bigger birth rates than white Brits (around a quarter of all babies born in the UK at the moment are ethnic minorities). So clearly demographics are changing within Europe and I think everyone knows this. UK is expected to be a minority-majority state by 2066, as will other european countries by then.

But that's not the point, the point is do we need actually record this crap anymore?? That's my point which I think needs addressing as I say we will all become what the definitions call 'mixed race' eventually some point this century.

Crap which you have just used in an attempt to support your own argument.
How would we know demographics are changing unless we recorded them in the first place?

You constantly refer to the UK and what will happen there (without any supporting evidence) and then assume the same changes will take place in all other European countries?

dxhound2005 · 01-01-2012 02:43PM

Gnobe wrote: »

That was the 2001 census, 10 years ago. There's been a much more liberal immigration policy implemented since. Its predicted to be around 88% this time.

Couple of things to point out, 22% of primary schoolchildren in England are not white. Ethnic minorities have bigger birth rates than white Brits (around a quarter of all babies born in the UK at the moment are ethnic minorities). So clearly demographics are changing within Europe and I think everyone knows this. UK is expected to be a minority-majority state by 2066, as will other european countries by then.

But that's not the point, the point is do we need actually record this crap anymore?? That's my point which I think needs addressing as I say we will all become what the definitions call 'mixed race' eventually some point this century.

Although it is prohibited in the census in France since 1872 other people can legally collect such statistics and for whatever reason have found it necessary or useful to do so. Their results do not show that the prohibition has been of advantage to ethnic minority people. In fact they claim that there is discrimination in France based on ethnicity.

Herb Powell · 01-01-2012 03:11PM

Now, I really hate the phrase "PC Brigade", because it's usually used as an insult in place of an argument by ****ing idiots excusing their own predjudices, but................

ShooterSF · 01-01-2012 03:33PM

juan.kerr wrote: »

OP, you may consider yourself mixed race but I don't consider myself to be and I don't plan to become mixed race in the near future.

You can't plan to become mixed race because you can't change race :P Unless you're Michael Jackson of course...
What a ridiculous statement.

SharpshooterTom · 01-01-2012 04:01PM

keith16 wrote:

(without any supporting evidence)

http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s001012/sfr12-2011.pdf

Page 20:
Number of ethnic minority primary school children in England (not including White irish/other):
704,385

Total number of pupils: 3,256,015
= 21.63%

And that number has been continuely increasing every year by the way.

dxhound2005 wrote: »

In fact they claim that there is discrimination in France based on ethnicity.

I've heard this argument and accept why they have say it, but I just think overall it would better if society didn't recognise race at all whatsoever. Like I say demographics are changing anyway in favour of "mix race" (which will help France) and if there is one human race like everyone says, then why is it recorded?

keith16 · 01-01-2012 04:16PM

Gnobe wrote: »

keith16 wrote:

(without any supporting evidence)

http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s001012/sfr12-2011.pdf

Page 20:
Number of ethnic minority primary school children in England (not including White irish/other):
704,385

Total number of pupils: 3,256,015
= 21.63%

And that number has been continuely increasing every year by the way.

dxhound2005 wrote: »

In fact they claim that there is discrimination in France based on ethnicity.

I've heard this argument and accept why they have say it, but I just think overall it would better if society didn't recognise race at all whatsoever. Like I say demographics are changing anyway in favour of "mix race" (which will help France) and if there is one human race like everyone says, then why is it recorded?

Are you going to answer my other questions? France and the UK are famous for having multi-cultural societies, but you seem to think that trends in these countries will apply globally? What about countries which have little diversity? Are they going to turn beige overnight just because France and the UK say so?

Your argument is infuriating - let's not record race - here is the recorded data on race in schools in England to prove my point.

And through all of this you make the ridiculous assumption that the trend will continue in this manner ad infinitum.

nlgbbbblth · 01-01-2012 04:32PM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Ive generally refuse to answer (or give meaninglessly vauge answers to) questions about race and religion particularly on documents issued by the government.

Its none of their damn business.

Are you ashamed of your race and religious status?

Mike 1972 · 01-01-2012 04:47PM

nlgbbbblth wrote: »

Are you ashamed of your race and religious status?

Are you ashamed of your medical history/bank details/propensity for sexual relations with straw figures

If not do please tell all :rolleyes:

nlgbbbblth · 01-01-2012 04:49PM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Are you ashamed of your medical history/bank details

If not do please tell :rolleyes:

I don't think they're part of the census form.

Medical history is too wide a topic while bank details are irrelevant.

Race and religion are two easily answerable categories and provide useful statistical information. I don't understand why somebody would have an issue answering them. It's not as if you can be persecuted for your answers.

Mike 1972 · 01-01-2012 04:55PM

nlgbbbblth wrote: »

It's not as if you can be persecuted for your answers.

How so ?

nlgbbbblth · 01-01-2012 04:58PM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

How so ?

Stating your race and religion on a census form does not bring future harassment.

I don't get your opposition to this - why bother filling out the form at all?

Mike 1972 · 01-01-2012 05:04PM

nlgbbbblth wrote: »

Stating your race and religion on a census form does not bring future harassment.

You stated this twice without providing a shred of evidence to back it up.

Oh and both the Irish and UK census forms do include medical questions.

why bother filling out the form at all?

Leaving aside the threat of prosecution its a pretty good question actually.

nlgbbbblth · 01-01-2012 05:08PM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

You stated this twice without providing a shred of evidence to back it up.

I and my family have answered these categories on previous census forms and nothing bad has happened as a result. What proof do you have that it could be used against you? Your original reasoning was "none of their business".

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Oh and both the Irish and UK census forms do include medical questions.

My mistake - forgot the Irish one has some medical questions.

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Leaving aside the threat of prosecution its a pretty good question actually.

Probably could be avoided with an appropriate excuse.

BunShopVoyeur · 01-01-2012 05:19PM

Gnobe wrote: »

Does anyone now think it's time to remove race from the census and all government documents??

I think we should. I mean come on, it's been argued that we will all become mixed race eventually, probably within 100 years or so in countries like Britain.

The terms white, black, asian, mixed race etc are very archaic. There is no such thing as race, it should be omitted from society completely. I don't recognise mixed race people as mixed race simply because the human race is already one to begin with, so IMO, there are no mixed race people.

Like I say the world is becoming beige shortly and race is dying out anyway. Is it time we removed all these racial labels??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

Mike 1972 · 01-01-2012 05:19PM

nlgbbbblth wrote: »

I and my family have answered these categories on previous census forms and nothing bad has happened as a result.

Nothing bad has happened you so youve expanded your personal experience to encompass the entire population of every country under all possible future scenarios ?

nlgbbbblth wrote: »

Your original reasoning was "none of their business".

Which I stand by.

You may be willing to trust the current (and all future) governments not to misuse or loose your data but its hardly tinfoil hat stuff to conclude that "trust us were the government" shouldnt wash with any sane person. Especially when the Governments in question have such an apalling record regarding data security.

Batsy · 01-01-2012 05:33PM

Gnobe wrote: »

There is no such thing as race

Yes there is such thing as race.

You have a very left wing mindset in the sense that you believe everybody is equal and that nobody is different, which is just not the case.

SharpshooterTom · 01-01-2012 05:35PM

keith16 wrote: »

Are you going to answer my other questions? France and the UK are famous for having multi-cultural societies, but you seem to think that trends in these countries will apply globally? What about countries which have little diversity? Are they going to turn beige overnight just because France and the UK say so?

Ok lets run through some of them:

Australia - Just 20 million 'white' people. About 70% of their immigrants nowadays come from Asia. Expect an Asian majority by 2050 onwards or so.

USA - non-hispanic white population is set to fall below 50% by 2042. 90% of the USA incoming immigrants are not white (or not from Europe, one of the two).

Canada - Majority of immigrants are not white.

Brazil - White population fell below 50% for the first time recently. Mix Race/black people will become the majority shortly.

Many other european nations, e.g. Germany, Scandinavia, Holland, and countries like Spain and Italy (even Ireland) are changing. Baring Ireland, some of these countries have really low birth rates, whereas their minorites will not.

Globalisation is worldwide phenomenon now, nothing to do with France and Britain just 'saying' so. It affects lots of countries.

keith16 wrote:

Your argument is infuriating - let's not record race - here is the recorded data on race in schools in England to prove my point.

Yeah because it was these trends which gave me the idea of which the way the world is going, and I can see it within 50 years time and that now we do not need it. Obama's election was also a turning point for me. Globalisation is in full swing now and I suspect there will be more Obama's shortly. But yes I used those to prove a point because the terms are becoming out dated now IMO in the context of miscegenation and humanity which is set to become the norm.

keith16 wrote:

And through all of this you make the ridiculous assumption that the trend will continue in this manner ad infinitum.

Uh yeah obviously. The birth rates of the poorer nations (those nations that are doing the emigrating) are much higher.

Mike 1972 · 01-01-2012 05:43PM

Gnobe wrote: »

Ok lets run through some of them:.......Uh yeah obviously. The birth rates of the poorer nations (those nations that are doing the emigrating) are much higher.

In before I for one welcome our new overlords

dxhound2005 · 01-01-2012 05:48PM

So Europe and North America will become beige but Asia and Africa will be unaffected.

Steodonn · 01-01-2012 05:50PM

Gnobe wrote: »

They don't in most european countries. Infact collecting information on race is completely banned in France, nobody knows exactly how many black people there are, or muslims etc.

Muslims aren't a race

keith16 · 01-01-2012 05:57PM

Gnobe wrote: »

Ok lets run through some of them:

Australia - Just 20 million 'white' people. About 70% of their immigrants nowadays come from Asia. Expect an Asian majority by 2050 onwards or so.

USA - non-hispanic white population is set to fall below 50% by 2042. 90% of the USA incoming immigrants are not white (or not from Europe, one of the two).

Canada - Majority of immigrants are not white.

Brazil - White population fell below 50% for the first time recently. Mix Race/black people will become the majority shortly.

Many other european nations, e.g. Germany, Scandinavia, Holland, and countries like Spain and Italy (even Ireland) are changing. Baring Ireland, some of these countries have really low birth rates, whereas their minorites will not.

Globalisation is worldwide phenomenon now, nothing to do with France and Britain just 'saying' so. It affects lots of countries.

Yeah because it was these trends which gave me the idea of which the way the world is going, and I can see it within 50 years time and that now we do not need it. Obama's election was also a turning point for me. Globalisation is in full swing now and I suspect there will be more Obama's shortly. But yes I used those to prove a point because the terms are becoming out dated now IMO in the context of miscegenation and humanity which is set to become the norm.

Uh yeah obviously. The birth rates of the poorer nations (those nations that are doing the emigrating) are much higher.

Are you trolling? You are telling us to disregard these terms and yet you continue to use them yourself. In Australia there will be Asian majority? So what happened to all the beige people? Just because race patterns change in a country does not render use of ethnic labels redundant.

Are you seriously telling me that because of the dynamics of birth rates and immigration are currently pointing in one direction that they will continue to do so? And that being the case that intermarriage will happen to such a degree to produce a racially homogenous planet this century?

Do immigrant communities interbreed and integrate with the population seemlessly?

Honest opinion · 01-01-2012 06:36PM

Ellis Dee wrote: »

One of the first things that was drilled into my head when I studied anthropology at uni was that there is actually only one human race.:)

If the purpose of the census is to compile information that will assist in the planning of infrastructure and services, I fail to see what people's skin colour has to do with anything.

In fact, I wonder do we need a census at all. Many of the more efficiently governed countries in Europe haven't had censuses for decades. Instead, statistical compilation is an ongoing, almost real-time activity, and government planners have much better and more up-to-date figures at their disposal than is the case in Ireland.:)

Can you post a Link to back that up?

id imagine all countries in europe take a Census

01-01-2012 06:44PM

Of course there is only one human race.

The majority of modern science agrees as do the major religions.

That is a huge consensus.

Scanlas The 2nd · 01-01-2012 06:49PM

What's your opinion OP on the red and grey squirrel? Should we pretend there is no difference?

dxhound2005 · 01-01-2012 06:56PM

Ellis Dee wrote: »

One of the first things that was drilled into my head when I studied anthropology at uni was that there is actually only one human race.:)

If the purpose of the census is to compile information that will assist in the planning of infrastructure and services, I fail to see what people's skin colour has to do with anything.

In fact, I wonder do we need a census at all. Many of the more efficiently governed countries in Europe haven't had censuses for decades. Instead, statistical compilation is an ongoing, almost real-time activity, and government planners have much better and more up-to-date figures at their disposal than is the case in Ireland.:)

Nobody mentioned ethnology when you were studying?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ethnology

ballsymchugh · 01-01-2012 06:57PM

it may have something to do with epidemiology, certain diseases can be more prominent in certain races, like sickle cell anaemia or tay sach's disease.
the NHS in the uk collect all this kind of info, and the software i was using at work there used to have all the races in alphabetical order, starting with bangladeshi, then black african, black caribbean.. etc.
it was a pain in the arse checking the right one every time, so there may have been a spike in the number of bangladeshis living in white home county england for a few months last year before the software updated to having white british as default..

Mike 1972 · 01-01-2012 07:16PM

Honest opinion wrote: »

id imagine all countries in europe take a Census

The UK are giving serious consideration to not having any more

2011 could be the last one.

SharpshooterTom · 01-01-2012 08:10PM

keith16 wrote: »

You are telling us to disregard these terms and yet you continue to use them yourself.

I have no choice I have to, since everyone else does. But I am hopeful the world will mix up enough for people to start ignoring the concept of race more so. Not only that but the terms are completely and scientifically wrong. Getting rid of the terms on census forms etc will help us become a less race conscious society in the long run IMO. More mixed marriages will ensure from this as race will not be barrier and will be forgotten in time etc. The concept of "interracial marriage" is utterly stupid from naming point of view.

keith16 wrote:

In Australia there will be Asian majority? So what happened to all the beige people? Just because race patterns change in a country does not render use of ethnic labels redundant.

They'll presumabley become 'beige' eventually. It's proven that generations of immigrants tend to marry interracially more than the immigrants themselves. A new Australia will a lot more 'mixed race' than it is now obviously. A lot more.

keith16 wrote:

Are you seriously telling me that because of the dynamics of birth rates and immigration are currently pointing in one direction that they will continue to do so? And that being the case that intermarriage will happen to such a degree to produce a racially homogenous planet this century?

Certain sections of this planet will be racially mixed yes, parts already are, (e.g. Brazil, South and Central America). Birth rates are likely to stay the same for the time being.

keith16 wrote:

Do immigrant communities interbreed and integrate with the population seemlessly?

Eventually if they're long enough over generations yep.

keith16 · 01-01-2012 08:16PM

ballsymchugh wrote: »

it may have something to do with epidemiology, certain diseases can be more prominent in certain races, like sickle cell anaemia or tay sach's disease.
the NHS in the uk collect all this kind of info, and the software i was using at work there used to have all the races in alphabetical order, starting with bangladeshi, then black african, black caribbean.. etc.
it was a pain in the arse checking the right one every time, so there may have been a spike in the number of bangladeshis living in white home county england for a few months last year before the software updated to having white british as default..

This is an excellent point, not to mention the whole area of pharmacogenomics...how your genetic makeup influences how well you respond to certain drugs. Like it or not, there are genetic differences between the myriad of races and it's critical those genetic differences are taken into consideration during the development of drugs.

But hey, don't let science get in the way of the 'conventional wisdom' the OP is passing off as fact.

There is a mixed race president now and thats what we will all look like by 2100 :rolleyes:

Is It Time To Remove Race From The Census??

Comments