Search This Blog

Thursday, June 04, 2009

Discrimination: Treating things equally? Think Again!

One of professors I most respected in my life, Joseph Weiler, once asked: “What is discrimination?” Students in WTO class answered “Different Treatment by law”. Weiler said no. There is nothing wrong with treating people differently. Discrimination is treating similar things differently and different things similarly. Analogy... imagine now you are a policy maker, required to design policy concerning quantity of toilets in public places. Since male and female “peeability” is different, you have to discriminate male by creating more female toilets than male. If you realize in your daily lives in public places, be it in a restaurant, club, or malls, the line for female toilets are much longer and shifting of one female to another female using one toilet is much slower.

Now, we come to understand male and female are different in terms of “peeability”, therefore it is justifiable to differentiate treatment. Another VERY STRENOUS CONCEPT in discrimination issue. Male and female are different in “peeability” but not in terms of humanity, i.e. rights to breathe the air. Imagine if you are from outer space, as you get closer, you will see that human and animals are different, but you cant distinguish male and female. As you get even closer now you know human consists of male and female different skin colors, height, physiological characteristics. IF you get even closer, you will understand that even man is different in terms of sexual orientation (same thing as female). In philosophical diction, i call it comparator. What discriminates things depend on the comparator. You said male is different from female in terms of peeability not the right to breathe.

Issue of discrimination has been living side by side with human’s existence, yet little understanding and consensus is reached on this area. This is the root of many evils hitherto including Environmental protection under Kyoto Protocol, rights to legal aids, particularism versus universalism, torture, terrorism, child’s trafficking, gender discrimination, extreme poverty, illiteracy and freedom of expression. The biggest catch of environmental protection is States’ ego. U.S said China should have taken at least as much commitment as US does in reducing carbon emission. China said NO, US has been polluting our earth since industrial revolution in 17-18th century. It is not fair to ask China now (since china has just been emitting carbon few decades ago) to clean up the mess US caused by taking similar commitment. IS THIS DISCRIMINATION?

In gender issue, we are also confronted with many arguments, principally surrounding whether male and female are the same. If they are different, in what aspects they are different, i.e. physical abilities, leadership, rights to title of property or land? How to identify whether certain different treatments are due to different nature of male and female? Since physical abilities of male and female are different, we dissect Olympic competition into male and female category, especially for running and football.. But can physical abilities different justify difference in terms of rights to title of property or rights to freedom of speech? NO. This is an easy issue. What about different treatment in salary and career wise because women get pregnant and are physically weaker? So, even if a man and a woman are equally qualified for certain jobs, a boss differentiates their salaries and career development. IS THIS DISCRIMINATION?

Protection of aliens and citizens. States argue that citizens pay tax and are born with legal rights and obligations to the State, so it is fair to differentiate standard of treatment for aliens and citizens. Aliens/foreigners dont have to pay tax (VAT). If you travel to Europe and shop, you can claim for tax reimbursement in airport. The reason is because you are not enjoying the facilities the State provides for its citizen, such as free education, infrastructure, and housing subsidy. On the contrary, foreigners are discriminated in terms of quota of education in prestigious university in that country. Germany allows only 20% foreigners sitting in heidelberg (hypothetically), singapore puts quota on foreign students, irrespective of how smart the foreign student is! IS THIS DISCRIMINATION?

Rights of disabled children. Government in many countries spent 20-30% of educational budget for infrastructure that is intended to accommodate students with disabilities. In that particular country as well, as many as 20 million children do not go to school because of poverty. Suppose building special elevators costs 1000 and providing free education for 1 child is 20. The result of special elevators project helps 50 children with disabilities, while if this money is spent for free education it results in 500 normal children at school. Now if government decides to allocate this money for 500 normal children, it is different treatment. IS THIS DISCRIMINATION?

Last point, WAR. I have much passion in this issue. Suppose State A attacks State B because of abundant oil reserves in State B. State A also attacks State C with more oil reserves. When State A attacks State B, its soldiers cruelly killed the citizen and soldiers of State B because they are of different religion, ALTHOUGH STATE B doesnt fight back! Historically State C has been in tension with State B because of different political beliefs. When State A attacks State C, State C resists and it results in a huge war, a lot of lives are lost (torture, extreme gross violation of human rights), buildings are destroyed, and economy is down. Ramifications are tremendous! State A is sued B and C before an international court. State A was punished with full reparation made to B and long life embarrassment, while in the case of State C, State A only has to make partial reparation and that s all. IS THIS DISCRIMINATION?

Now the most sensitive issue in Indonesia. Chinese Discrimination. Few days ago, i argued tensely with my friend that Chinese has been discriminated until now. He said no. Bataknese is also discriminated when they come to Jakarta and deal with Javanese officials. It is normal because every race feels this sense of chauvinism. This sense of chauvinism grows into the practice of collusion. So he said, since not only chinese who was treated differently in Java, but also bataknese, there is no discrimination. WRONG! Discrimination happens because of different treatment that is measured by damage and quality of hatred. If Chinese is no treated similar to bataknese in Java, there is no discrimination amonng bataknese and chinese, but there is discrimination against chinese in Java. Discrimination doesn t happen ONLY IF the JAVANESE is treated similarly in Java as well. Now my friend gets smarter. He said Chinese in 1960 enjoys all the economic facilities while indonesian (pribumi) enjoys political careers. This political and economics trade off is meant to maintain US' support to Indonesia by means of international recognition. If Indonesia places the Chinese in political structure, it will be viewed by US as communist country. SO indonesia decided not to. Therefore, Chinese should be treated differently in terms of economy right now, such as pay more for driving license, permit, identity card and passport (not entirely true, but it still happens!). Sigh, i said this is what is wrong. Differentiating Chinese and non Chinese for its political rights based on economy differences is not correct.You can differentiate treatment ONLY IF the difference you are using is relevant to the different treatment. FOr example peeability between male and female for different treatment if number of toilets, not the right to breathe!

The concept of discrimination is strenuous subject. As long as international community and human in general cannot strike a right balance, our world will be filled with homo homini lupus. The strong one eats the weak one. The strong one dictates human rights. The strong one tells the rest what is right and what is wrong. The weak one feels dissatisfied, outraged, rebel and WAR!
My quote “War is the child of every regime, be it classical democracy in Athens or John Locke/Montesquieu’ trias politica. It is meant to create confusion and blur the line of the perfect balance of rights. When confusion is in place, human is nothing else but animals!”

2 comments:

  1. Wow,Jo, cool, I learn a lot...This is correct... Homo Homini Lupus

    ReplyDelete
  2. wow,,, that's cool.... like ur write...

    ReplyDelete