I was thinking of how much I despised filling out the 2010 census. I felt insulted by the questions and had considered not sending it in. Today I realized why it bothered me so much. In our country, where we are supposed to treat everyone the same, no matter what color or nationality they are, the government is enforcing it's own racist policies via the US Census.
On the census there are many different kinds of browns to choose from, many different sub groupings of non-whites, non-European peoples. I had considered leaving the areas requiring racial information blank. What did the government care what color I am? What difference did it make? Why are all non-browns, non-latinos lumped together? When I investigated the necessity of this information to the government I found it was, in part, a way to decide voting districts as well as dispensation of government monies. Voting districts are designated along racial lines? Government handouts go by racial heritage not need? Are certain races more needy by dint of their color or language? Is the government perpetuating a welfare race by it's application of racial profiling? Look what the US did to the indigenous peoples. They hobbled them through forced dependence. Why is the issue of one's Latin heritage so important to the census? Could it be related to the 57% democrat versus the 23% republican partisian allegiance that Latinos claim? When will our government stop being racist in order to further it's own subversive agenda?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
It's called gerrymandering, and unscrupulous politicians will cut a city into a razorwire salad to ensure minority are diluted to the point of having no vote.
Social programs are most effective when they cater to the community they serve, so it's important to know which ethnic populations are where. These communities are "new" Americans and, just a few generations ago, we probably would have seen more requests for European ethnicity information. But those people are fairly homogenized by now.
Also, the statistic about HIV infections has everything to do with receptive anal intercourse. I'm sure you'll find women who receive their partners in the rectum will also display a similar spike on the charts. It has to do with inelastic tissue, resulting anal fissures, and HIV's preference for using white blood cells as a vehicle.
Social programs intended to control a population through dependance. Look at native Americans, look at Americans of African descent, did the same intentional aid help them?
I know how HIV is spread. The percentage of anal intercouse between male homosexuals is much higher than that of the heterosexual population. That is why the rate if HIV/AIDS is so high among male homosexuals. Use condoms guys.
Post a Comment