You see racism because you want to, it may be that BAME have less money than other groups and if that were true then to acknowledge it is not racism, it might be that BAME groups don't traditionally join mainstream political parties or order their budgets differently, it could be any number of things.
Here you go, here's a question for you, do you believe women only short lists in any walk of life is sexist?
Again you are lumping all BAME into a group and not treating them as individuals and making assumptions on their ability to pay. Thats a form of stereo-typing and is inherently racist. It can be argued that a fairer system would be charge all people an amount that they can afford and therefore not base the costs on the group you allocate them too.
I don't see racism because i want to. i'm a big believer in equality of opportunity for all.
So when i see a policy, rule or statement i usually apply a bit of reciprocity to the situation (i.e. substitute a different race/gender etc). If the recipricol arrangement appears unfair or discrimatory then that must also apply to the original situation also, and hence how i would judge something as racist sexist etc.
And yes i do see women only short lists as sexiest for a couple of reasons, but mainly because i don't believe in equality of outcome (only equality of opportunity)
The integral basis for gender/race only short lists is the belief that if an organisation doesn't mirror local/national demographics then something is wrong. This flies in the face of or ignores things like personal choice/ preferences, culture and the differences between individuals etc.
For examples of this you only have to look at Scandanavia, which is considered the place where people are most free to make whatever life & employment choices as they want; female nurses outnumber male nurses something like 20:1, and vice versa with male engineers outnumbering females by a similiar ratio.
Therefore if you try to make people fit into a pre-determined outcome, you end up in part removing their free will and choices, or coerce people into making choices they don't want or block them doing what they wish.
Secondly, i am opposed to corralling people into groups and then basing their needs/ requirements upon whatever group they have been arbitarily placed under. I'm of the belief that all people should be treated as an individual with regard to their needs/ requirements.
Thirdly, again by having women only short lists etc you are only considering people from one type of group to arrive at a flawed pre-conceived outcome. It can be considered/argued that by favouring only one group you are elevating their position for supposed 'good' reasons, but in doing so you end up ignoring/neglecting people in other groups (who based on merit should also be considered). This is a form of oppression to which i am against in any form.
