Institutional racism

Following a discussion of institutional racism on this site last month, I sent an email to CURE seeking their perspective on the problem. I asked what information they had on the existence of institutional racism in Bermuda and whether any investigations had been done to determine which institutions were affected.

CURE executive officer Myra Virgil sent me a lengthy response, which I had been planning to incorporate into a column on the subject. Since I've now taken a step back from the column, however, here's what she had to say:

Let's begin with a common definition. Institutional racial discrimination can be understood as a subtle form of racism that exists in systems. It is imbedded in policy and its effect is to maintain the power, influence and well-being of one racial group over another. The key word in this definition is that it is subtle. Even the most complex of investigatory techniques are inadequate to flesh it out, let alone substantiate its existence in such a form palatable to the larger community.

I'd say the other key word in that definition is "effect". Institutional racism does not have to be deliberate and conscious.

One of our stakeholders once said to us, as her working definition of institutional racism, "if you look around, and everyone around you looks and sounds the same as you, then you or your organisation is practicing some form of institutional discrimination".

That's an interesting definition, not least because it could be applied to the PLP too.

The major institutions in Bermuda are white-owned or ultimately, white-powered. This outcome is historically designed. Without very concerted efforts to include people of colour, the racial make-up of the workforce is unlikely to change (as people tend to be more comfortable with others who look like them).

In practical terms, institutional racism could sound like this:

1. "This position requires 8 years experience" (when a survey of industry professionals indicate a necessity of 4); or

2. "We require the XYZ qualification and the TWZ" (and it just so happens that Joe work-permit holder, here, has those exact qualifications and has been with us so he is more familiar with the business); or

3. "Oh, you mean you only have the TWZ- sorry" (the job description has changed since last year and we now require this additional qualification).

And more, for example, every year, employers tell us that they can not find black Bermudians to take on certain positions. Yet, when we ask them if they have put in place a succession plan or training program, so
that the future looks different, there is very little being done.

We have heard too many black Bermudian professionals tell a story of taking on quite senior positions in organisations, and getting none of the grooming that is afforded to white people, often white ex-patriated workers. This grooming, which truly is a model for success, involves ensuring that the employee is part of the decision-making process that has implications for the jobs they do. That "coaching/mentoring" process sees the employee getting appropriate introductions and connections to the people who will make a difference in their success. There are networking and mentoring activities that go on in Bermuda, from which blacks report being specifically excluded. They report not being introduced to the people they need to meet to effect change and to move up. They report that their white counterparts do get these connections made for them.

Although people claim there is an even playing field now and all access to opportunities is equal, it's not yet true. Black people are not starting form the same starting positions as whites, Bermudian or otherwise. Few black people have cushions of wealth, generational experience, business ownership, etc. At this point, what people are really saying is that there are no known barriers to stop blacks from gaining entry to "opportunity". However, there are very many clever ways to exclude people in seemingly legitimate ways.

So, while you ask about evidence of institutional racism, there is very little overt evidence. Qualifications and job requirements can be tweaked to ensure that a pre-selected candidate is appointed to a position. Employees can be made to feel so excluded that they become disenchanted, disengaged and ultimately leave positions. Employees can be treated in such subtle and different ways, that while their gut feelings are that the treatment is race-related, to compile enough "evidence" to make a declaration is impossible. So these situations go relatively unchallenged. However, the evidence of a degree of institutional racism is in the statistics.

Rather than talk about investigating institutional racism, which essentially asks the question, "Is this happening in my organisation?", people might be better served to ask the question, "How is this happening in my organisation?".

So to answer your question, investigations or inquiries into the presence of institutional racial discrimination are tasks that we undertake, more with a goal of understanding and exploring, rather than consequencing- at this point. CURE conducted 20 such inquires with employers in 2004. Note however, that CURE queried both employers with poor levels of representation, as well as those that were excellent. The objective being to explore problems but also explore what works!

There were over 15 recommendations that came out of this process and to which any community members should read and attend. It's a joint responsibility.

In response to a question about whether any research has been conducted into the causes of the salary discrepancies between black and white Bermudians, Ms. Virgil said:

Any executive or human resource person worth their salt can devise what appears to be an objective pay scale grid that results in differential pay outcomes, based on qualifications and experience. We are fairly certain that to attempt to ascertain and "prove" that the salary differentials are race-based, is an exercise in futility. And of course, there are so many ways to award employees without appearing discriminatory on the face of things (housing allowances, relocation allowances, travel bonuses, private school fee supplements, etc.)

In conclusion:

We know institutional racial discrimination is present in the workforce, as well as some very real incidents of overt discrimination. It is both intentional and conscious and unintentional and unconscious. But the critical activity that has to occur is IMPROVING rather than PROVING it. Improving the outcomes for racial inclusion and the protection of human rights is about helping people understand and commit to a philosophy of equality of opportunity. And this is where CURE has placed its emphasis- the education, the awareness, and encouraging the difficult and courageous dialogues.

Comments

[Simon on 31.10.05 at 09:11]

Did you ask them the question specifically related to IB? I notice a huge absence of comment from them on the Institutional Racism embedded in the views of our current Government.

[Yet Another Limey on 31.10.05 at 09:31]

I don’t think the ‘we just want to re-issue a work permit’ job adverts are institutionalised racism. If you already have an ex-pat working at a job and you just need their work permit renewed then of course you’re going to issue a job advert that says ‘Butcher required: at least 7 years 2 months experience needed willing to work shifts, preferably called John.’

When you’re bringing someone onto the island for the first time, then it’s a different matter.

[Nicolette on 31.10.05 at 10:12]

Phil or anyone:

"There were over 15 recommendations that came out of this process and to which any community members should read and attend. It's a joint responsibility"

where can these be found?

[Full Fullish on 31.10.05 at 10:21]

While I think that exempt companies should have a grooming process for locals, I think we would be overstepping our boundries to tell them who they should put in as CFO, COO, CEO, etc. What CURE has failed to take into account is that there these companies do have a grooming process, however it's usually back in the States, not here. I believe the Guilden said that the Bahamas has a law about having local understudies for all exempt companies, why hasn't CURE suggested we do something like this? This would greatly diminish institutional racism.

"Although people claim there is an even playing field now and all access to opportunities is equal, it's not yet true. Black people are not starting form the same starting positions as whites, Bermudian or otherwise. Few black people have cushions of wealth, generational experience, business ownership, etc. At this point, what people are really saying is that there are no known barriers to stop blacks from gaining entry to "opportunity". However, there are very many clever ways to exclude people in seemingly legitimate ways."

I do have an issue with this comment however. I think that a small minority have cushions of wealth. The average Bermudian has, in the last generation, had to make it on their own (Hell I know I have had to!) black or white. CURE is being very vague about the "Clever Ways to exlude people" from becoming business owners. If there is Institutional racism happening, they need to pin point it and make it known. Vague comments don't help anyone here. I know lots of people both black and white who have setup business of their own, including myself, without generational experience or business ownership. I still find it hard to believe that on an Island with a black government (yes the PLP are all black), and with a good majority of the populace being black that there are barriers for black Bermudians to setup a business here in today's society. I do feel that a good majority of Bermudians, both black and white are for once starting from the same starting block. If I'm incorrect please tell me, but I want examples and facts, nothing vague as in the above CURE quote.

[Raptor on 31.10.05 at 10:54]

Myra Virgil gave a very thoughtful response, clearly and admirably focused on flushing out white institutional racism against blacks.

"The major institutions in Bermuda are white-owned or ultimately, white-powered," she writes. While this may be the case, it does not follow that ALL white individuals involved in these institutions are consciously or unconsciously racist. I think that needs to be kept in mind, and print, wherever there are discussions like this, and especially when the words are coming from a government organization. Everything is not just black or white, even though there are those out there who believe all whites should be labeled racist whether they know that about themselves or not.

While racism against blacks, institutional or otherwise, must be dealt with, undeniably both as an historical and present issue, and as a primary focus, I would also like to hear Ms. Virgil include the fact that whites--very often NOT the owners or powers that be--are discriminated against as well, and not just subtley, but by the leaders of the current government, as well as in other circumstances (not likely, I know!).

Making CURE's work TOO one-sided will not solve the problem. A sense of fairness encourages everyone to try harder and examine himself/herself.

Also, I would like to know what the 15 recommendations are.

[tilti on 31.10.05 at 10:56]

I have a problem with suggestion that there is subtle institutional racism. For one thing it creates a dichotomy of oppresive whites on one side against a homogenous groups of vitimized balcks on the other. There is a serious problem here because this doesn't address gender differnces within the black community at all. Women in every country and demographic face more discrimination than men and higher barriers to entry. In addition to this is the overwelming number of single black mothers in Bermuda who are forced to manage their school/work with their family life. Yet, despite all of this, young women are makig greater gains in the work place and from my experience women (both black and white) are more driven and hardworking than men in the same age group. The key word here is young, as Bermuda is just starting to get past a historical bias against women, but if this trend continues at its present trajectory the Bermudian workforece will look very differnt in 20 years time.
If institutional racism is as widespread as is beleived by CURE, than the reality that black women, who have the cards stacked against them in both business and within their racial group would seem radically counterintuitive. Such a finding however would go a long way to disproving the basis of CURE's arguement.

[SmokingGun on 31.10.05 at 11:24]

"Let's begin with a common definition. Institutional racial discrimination can be understood as a subtle form of racism that exists in systems. It is imbedded in policy and its effect is to maintain the power, influence and well-being of one racial group over another. The key word in this definition is that it is subtle. Even the most complex of investigatory techniques are inadequate to flesh it out, let alone substantiate its existence in such a form palatable to the larger community." -Myra Virgil.

Just from the current focus and methods of CURE it could very easily fall into this very same trap and be considered an organisation that practices institutionalized racial discrimination.

CURE should be re-focused and re-named named CURE-ALL.

[Pondblogger on 31.10.05 at 12:04]

Isn't it refreshing, whether you agree with this lady or not, that she gave a full and robust reply to Limey's questions? I thought it was in dramatic contrast to the strangulated nonsense normally on offer from officials in the new Bermuda, and I appreciated her taking the time to explain her thinking.

[silencedogood on 31.10.05 at 12:13]

Ladies and Gents,

In the true spirit of Halloween, CURE is on a witch hunt. And like any good witch hunt it doesn’t end until someone confesses. Institutionalized racism can exist, but to argue that efforts to remove it do not require proof is so stupid it’s beyond words. Rather than write a point-by-point rebuttal to her condescending, paternalistic and McCarthy-esque letter (which I had begun to do) I will instead summarize her argument:

1) Institutionalized racism must be assumed in all organizations. No proof required.

2) The concept of institutional racism only applies to mixed-race or predominantly non-black organizations. It specifically does not apply to the civil service or to CURE itself.

2) All non-black workers, regardless of whether they were Bermudian or not, were born rich and into families who did the job they currently hold. Thus wealth, knowledge and networks were seamlessly transferred.

3) Qualifications and Experience are just smokescreens to keep the black worker (particularly the black man) down. They have no objective benefit to the hiring process.

4) Once the “improbable” hiring of a black Bermudian male occurs, management immediately sets up barriers to that man’s advancement. No barriers are naturally occurring or faced by all races equally. Even if such barriers did exist (which they don’t) it is impossible for the black male worker to overcome any obstacles. The path must be smooth, straight, flat and clear otherwise failure is imminent.

5) The absolutely established fact that this is all occurring can only be remedied by government intervention. The job security of Myra Virgil and continued existence of CURE has nothing to do with these assertions.

I have now seen the light and wish to amend my comments from the “Follow your Passion” thread. Parents, if you did not have time to buy the “evil International Businessperson” suit, another hot costume this year is the “Bermuda Shorts of Terror” costume for those wishing to represent diabolical local interests this Halloween. It includes its own organization chart, pay scale manipulation calculator, and a list of black Bermudian qualifications and tips on how to avoid them.

[SmokingGun on 31.10.05 at 12:50]

For CURE's Halloween party I was thinking of dressing up as a Portuguese Bermudian so I could say I really was from another world.

[Tiger Bay on 31.10.05 at 13:04]

The hiring practices she describes certainly can be used to block people of certain races. But that race doesn't have to be black. In fact, I've had those exact practices used here against white me.

[The Limey on 31.10.05 at 13:39]

Nicolette

The recommendations mentioned can be found on pages 12 to 16 of CURE's "From Survey to Practice: Equality of Opportunity Initiatives in Bermuda 2004" Report. Copies are available at CURE's office (but alas, not on their website).

[SmokingGun on 31.10.05 at 14:27]

Exatly the point Tiger Bay. Years ago I too had an experience whereby one of Bermuda's largest privately owned companies didn't even give me an interview after I had sent in an application for a very senior position being offered. The fact that they already knew I had years of experience from both a vendor side as well as knowing their business inside out from it's customer's needs. I even had their employees asking for me to apply! In the end it turned out they already had an Ex-Pat who wanted to move to Bermuda and was married to the daughter of a close friend of the CFO. I won't say he wasn't qualified but it was a sham from the start even advertising the job. Nothing to do with race, he just wanted to help get his buddies daughter back on the island.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 31.10.05 at 15:03]

Limey,

"One of our stakeholders once said to us, as her working definition of institutional racism, "if you look around, and everyone around you looks and sounds the same as you, then you or your organisation is practicing some form of institutional discrimination".

That's an interesting definition, not least because it could be applied to the PLP too."

On the surface it could be said of the PLP due its membership make up and the faces of its MPs. However, the PLP has NEVER excluded whites.

Let's face reality, the PLP started its life as a party geared to righting the racial imbalance that existed in Bermuda and to some degree still does exist. Just as many still view the UBP as representing the white establishment, there is a view that the PLP only represents the black community. The major difference between the UBP and the PLP is that the UBP realsied that it needed votes from the black community in order to retain the government and it actively pursued black membership to achieve this goal. The PLP is open to membership by any person in Bermuda black or white and there should be no need to specifically target white membership.

When Barbara Ball joined the PLP as one of its first white members she was ostracised by many in the white community. Today whites still have a problem, for the most part, joining predominenetly black institutions. I have raised it before, desegregation occurred in Bermuda because blacks joined white institutions, not the other way around.

So for you to equate the PLP with institutional racism is absolutely ridiculous.

[Tiger Bay on 31.10.05 at 15:16]

"desegregation occurred in Bermuda because blacks joined white institutions, not the other way around"

It's a two way street. In desegregation, intitutions finally realised that they needed to be inclusive - and could benefit from it. It was a normalisation of society.

I don't see that in the PLP; the party uses race as something to divide the community, to excuse its failures, and to solidify its power base.

[JJ on 31.10.05 at 15:27]

Yet another Limey wrote:
"I don’t think the ‘we just want to re-issue a work permit’ job adverts are institutionalised racism. If you already have an ex-pat working at a job and you just need their work permit renewed then of course you’re going to issue a job advert that says ‘Butcher required: at least 7 years 2 months experience needed willing to work shifts, preferably called John".

Am I missing something here? I thought the renewal of a work permit required the role be advertised so that a qualified Bermudian could apply and be hired, just as it would be if it was a new position which might eventually, if no qualified Bermudians applied, be filled by an ex-pat. What's the difference?

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 31.10.05 at 15:32]

Tiger,

"In desegregation, intitutions finally realised that they needed to be inclusive - and could benefit from it. It was a normalisation of society."

I have to disagree with you, "finally realised" you say, the institutions were forced in many ways to desegregate, a case in point, the theatres, which changed ONLY after the theatre boycott. If blacks had not protested and removed their economic support this desegregation would not have happened until many years later.

As far as solidifying its power base, I may not necessarily agree with it but that is the nature of politics, is it not? You do what best serves you politically. The UBP for years did the same thing, although there were black faces as MPs the power base of the party came from the wealthy and influential white community.

[bw&p?? on 31.10.05 at 15:36]

Agreed Guilbert - Absolutely ridiculous!!
It's only the PLP leader who is on record for issuing a racist comment!

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 31.10.05 at 15:41]

bw&p,

I guess you believe that when Sir John Swan made the comment that young black males are a problem in Bermuda he was not speaking on behalf of the UBP.

[bw&p?? on 31.10.05 at 15:55]

Not sure about young black males but I can tell you that I was a problem in Bermuda when I was younger....young people in general are. Just take a look at Michael Hinds traffic solution piece last week.
If John Swan made the comment as premier of course he was speaking for the UBP...absolutely. You'll have to clarify your point though, cause I'm not seeing it.

[Tiger Bay on 31.10.05 at 15:57]

Guilden - I started to type a second message and then was distracted. I don't disagree with you. The companies were forced, but eventually realised the opportunities/mutual benefit of this change. Today, the vast majority of local institutions actively seek to include the spectrum of Bermudians.

Except for one: the PLP.

And yes, my PLP brush is broad. I believe that Alex Scott, Ewart Brown, and others use race in a cynical way. From personal experience, I know many party supporters do not like that.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 31.10.05 at 16:06]

Tiger,

"Except for one: the PLP"

I disagree but you can very simply prove me wrong by trying to become a PLP Party member. Approach the party about membership and if you are turned away I will stand very firmly behind your comment.

You are correct that many party supporters do not like the use of race and I am one of them but my support of the party is not Ewart Brown or Alex Scott.

The only thing Renee Web did that was different from what the UBP did for 30 years was vocalise her goals.

[SmokingGun on 31.10.05 at 16:08]

Guilden, the word "subtle" is key as far as Mz. Virgil explains. When Messrs Scott, Brown and Burch along with Ms. Webb make regular comments that could very easily be considered having a racial underlining, isn't that a "subtle" form? Maybe they just don't get it?

And as far as Swan representing the UBP with his comments? He pretty much fired that off with a short barrel of buck shot that whacked the UBP as much as anyone so why would they feel he "represented" their way of thinking?

You may well be right about whites not joining the PLP because they feel like they will be ostracized but the truth is that many would like to join a party other than the UBP. But I seriously doubt the PLP is all that interested in changing it's ways to welcome and support white involvement in running things from the inside. It's that old catch 22 thing.

[Yet Another Limey on 31.10.05 at 16:10]

JJ, “I thought the renewal of a work permit required the role be advertised so that a qualified Bermudian could apply and be hired”

Yes it is, and indeed it is technically wrong of employers to want to keep their existing trained and integrated expat employee over hiring a ‘green’ but capable Bermudian of any race. But I don’t believe it’s institutional racism.

However I would say the PLP could be accused of institutional racism. While they are willing and probably welcoming of white members, there is a general perception of the PLP being a ‘black’ organisation. I believe it’s these often misguided perceptions of companies and organisations that cause institutional racism.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 31.10.05 at 16:17]

SmokinGun,

You cannot bring about change simply by complaining. How do you know whether or not the PLP can change if you do not make the effort to get to know the party outside what you ready in the press.

I was once "in" the UBP in an executive capacity of Leaders of Tomorrow and I sat on the St. George South Branch when Grace Bell was the sitting MP. Plus for a short time I was involved in Progressive Youth.

[silencedogood on 31.10.05 at 16:21]

Here we are, back on the PLP. Guilden, my interpretation of the Limey's post was that it was ridiculing the excessively broad definition of institutionalized racism.

There are legitimate reasons why, despite best efforts at inclusion, an organization may end up being composed almost entirely of one race. For example, Would you like to join my Barry Mannilow club? Maybe a bad example because it would probably be composed of no one at all, but interests, etc. can play a role.

The PLP probably have never done anything overt to exclude whites as far as rules, it is more their policies which are perceived as racially divisive which put whites off, but that is a very different thing than institutionalized racism. In that sense I agree with you.

I think a better definition than the very subjective "look around" one used by CURE. Rules intended to discriminate and rules applied in a discriminatory way. It covers the universe of realistic examples mentioned on this thread and has a long legal history abroad.

[Yet Another Limey on 31.10.05 at 16:38]

Silencedogood, “Here we are, back on the PLP”

As a relative newcomer to the island, which organisations are perceived as being institutionally racist against blacks? (This is a genuine question, please excuse my ignorance)

I know historically the banks had a reputation for pulling in the mortgages of politically active black people, which in turn could lead to a current perception of racism.

[SmokingGun on 31.10.05 at 16:45]

Guilden, it's not a matter of complaining, although there is truth to the squeaky wheel theory. It's the general impression that is allowed to permeate the air. It's a very subtle breeze that seems to whisper, thanks but no thanks.

Oh and as far as Barry Mannilow, Silencedogood. Be careful as this is Limey's site and I'm sure he's quite fond of singing "Mandy" every now and then.

[silencedogood on 31.10.05 at 17:08]

Yet Another Limey,

I'm not sure I'm the most qualified to list them because I've only been walking the earth for a limited time.

I've always heard the Bank was bad and that some of the old money businesses were insular. The latter may not be racism but nepotism. I would throw that Q out to everyone.

As for today, I've never heard anything myself. It seems most companies want any Bermudian willing to work who has a some intelligence. That's just my experience though.

[Longtime Lurker on 31.10.05 at 17:14]

Guilden,

The suggestions of trying to "join" the PLP to effect change seem strange to me. It's one thing to break down barriers by working in a bank or joining a club - people probably want to be part of these organizations in the first place. But why would someone join a political party opposed to their ideas? You become a part of political parties because they already agree with you!

To point out the absurdity: I live in the US, and I lean to the left. Should I join the Democratic Party, or should I join the Republican Party and try to change their platform?

The mere fact that in Bermuda we can actually speak like that suggests to me that the UBP and the PLP are actually very similar in politics, and the real reason that they exist as separate organizations is because of artificial racial barriers (institutional or otherwise).

That said, I'm surprised at the strong denial of instutional racism that this post has caused. I think that PLP does have institutional racism, but largely as a response to the environment around them. While overt racism has largely gone in Bermuda, I think that it definitely still exists in the population's subconscious. It is hard to determine the extent of its effects are, however.

In a study in California, identical resumes were sent out to a variety of firms, the only difference was that some had "white" names, others had "black" names. The "white" applications received many more offers for interviews. Do we think that the results of a similar study in Bermuda be different?

[black male on 31.10.05 at 17:37]

The color purple is a perfect example of racism. Backward black male put in place by a loudmouth black female. This poor black female recruitment is an insult to every black man. what political comment has ms. farmer ever made on any issue? in the last election the black male defeated his black female counterpart and almost defeated others.. the UBP is insulting the black race again and don't even know it.

[arudawakening on 31.10.05 at 18:05]

Racism is continuously couched in Black vs White terms, however, there is a growing population of Asians on the island who are not doing as well as either the Blacks or the Whites on the island. Is CURE also concerned about the playing field for them?

[Mike Hind on 31.10.05 at 18:44]

Amen, arudawakening.

[blovator on 31.10.05 at 21:28]

Guilden

When is quacks like a duck, swims like a duck and lays green eggs - its a duck. The PLP is a race oriented party far more than than the UBP. The UBP actively pursued mixed membership as a tactical move. The PLP remained black and did not encourage white membership as a tactical move. Politics in Bermuda is racial. Parochial racism. We don't hate each other. We don't think nasty things about each others mental and biological makeup. We just like our own kind.

People join political parties often because they are encouraged. Parties talent hunt. The PLP does not solicite white members. And white people know that many people in the PLP would rather have a heart attack than admit that they won that big election partly due to white votes. The PLP is all black. You can call a duck a dog all day. It will still be a duck when the sun goes down. Part of the power of the PLP's power is based in racial purity. Period. Stop being a college professor about it.

[Turtle on 31.10.05 at 21:43]

Thank you Limey for letting us know what CURE had to say. I have always wondered what the official definition of institutional racism is. But I found the 'working definition' much more useful. :

"One of our stakeholders once said to us, as her working definition of institutional racism, "if you look around, and everyone around you looks and sounds the same as you, then you or your organisation is practicing some form of institutional discrimination".

Maybe this is not the case with some other posters, but for me it struck uncomfortably close to home. I worked in a place that would fit that definition - at the upper pay levels. At the lower, clerical levels, people all looked the same too, only not like me, but more like Renee or Alex. The worst thing was that some of the clerical staff had the same education, skills and abilities as I did, but were never considered for promotion or grooming for better positions. They were exploited: the employer used their brains and education and conscientiousness, and continued to pay them a clerical salary. You might think this sounds like something from the 1950s but let me assure you I am talking about the 21st century in Bermuda. I, and others at that place of employment spent a lot of time trying to figure out whether the boss did this intentionally or whether it was completely unconscious. I think it was a bit of both, myself.

As Ms. Virgil points out we are often most comfortable with people who look like us - and I would add that sometimes we aren't even aware that we are exercising that bias. This is prejudice or racism that has become 'institutionalised' within our selves. In finding out about this people have faced some very unpleasant truths - truths that are not their 'fault', because they stem from the society in which we live, but which are within our power to change, once we are aware of them.

When we change ourselves, we will change our institutions.

[loki on 31.10.05 at 22:17]

Blotavor - bravo, my man.

[Alex M. DeCouto on 31.10.05 at 22:25]

Many of you have been quick to dismiss the 'subtleties' of racial bias, but the fact that contemporary racism is subtle has been subject which has been studied in depth. Ms. Virgil is not speaking from personal experience or subjective reasoning (as many of you are) but on the basis of proven research and data. I would encourage many of you nay-sayers in particular to read: http://scholar.google.com/url?sa=U&q=http://www.psych.yorku.ca/kawakami/documents/Whycantwejustgetalong.pdf

As you will read, it is an absolutely normal human psychological process to harbour negative feelings and beliefs about anything different than ourselves, which can frequently lead to 'subtle' or "aversive racism". Frequently, those so quick to dismiss the possiblity that that inequality exists and openly support egalitarian values while harbouring negative feelings may discriminate, often unintentionally, when their behavior can be justified on the basis of some factor other than race.

Racial disparities in our social and workplace settings will continue to plague us until we recognize the possibility that we all can and do exhibit racial bais with some degree of regularity. Unlike anything which could be labeled 'subtle', the statistics prove over and over that this is in fact happening.

[Alex M. DeCouto on 31.10.05 at 22:29]

http://www.psych.yorku.ca/
kawakami/documents/Whycantwejustgetalong.pdf

Didn't look like the link copied totally.

[F*&^ed-off- with-the-usual-s*&^ on 31.10.05 at 23:20]

Don't you all know that there is no race problem it Bermuda, it is only in the head of the whites, in actual fact the whites here are racist in the extreme sense of the word and have been surpressing the poor black man for so long and the inbalance must be addressed by them rising up. The white man is wrong!!! He will always be wrong, until he admits that he is surpressing the black man!!!!The black must only deal with the black community so that they can get ahead, they must only deal with those that look like them,....wait haven't I heard that somewhere before! Face it we have been enslaving the black race for far too long and we must give them their freedom then bow before them and their splendor and feel ashamed for our terrible terrible attitude toward them that has never allowed them to rise to their rightful position in society as our, the lowly white mans, overlord.

I tremble before the might of such as our powerful, wonderful leadership who do no wrong but try and lead us poor pitiful white folk to the light as they see it.

[Uncle Elvis on 01.11.05 at 01:02]

yeah, F*&^ed-off, 'cuz that helps...

I understand your anger. I understand how it feels.
However, we're trying to come up with solutions here.

Do you have any? Anything constructive to add?

Me, I'm at the point, when it comes to Governing us, that I don't give a crap WHO's in charge, as long as they do their job.

If the PLP can actually START doing something - about racism, about housing, about education, about ANYTHING other than a couple of ferries and some flags - then they will see the support.

I do believe that there is institutionalized racism. What kinda bothered me about the response is that is seems to be one-sided. I agree that, traditionally, it has been a white-against-black problem, in this day and age, it's now hitting us from both sides.
I know the focus for a lot of people is business. IB or the banks or whatever. There probably is a problem with black folks not being able to get the higher-up jobs. I don't know. I don't work in these fields. Most of the people I know don't. But let's look at the "little people" for a sec.
I can only speak for myself, and thus can only come from my experience and the jobs I've had/would be suited for/would want...

Do you think I could get a job at Spinning Wheel?
I have 15 years experience working in bars and nightclubs.
How about Casey's? Hilly's? Hubie's?

Before the new management took over, how about Liberty Theatre?

I'm sure there will be responses couched behind affirmative action etc.

I'm just trying to show where some of the anger and bitterness from people is coming from. There IS a need for protection. There IS a need to help people that are being held back.
The problem is that it does seem one-sided, when it says it's about equality.

If we are going to try to get rid of this problem, we need to take the blinders off and deal with it wherever it happens and not just when it's big business.

[Raptor on 01.11.05 at 11:44]

Alex DeCouto, thank you for direction to the article “Why Can’t We Just Get Along: Interpersonal Biases and Interracial Distrust,” by Dovidio, Gaertner, Kawakami, and Hodson. It is quite fascinating, and I would recommend it for all:

http://www.psych.yorku.ca/
kawakami/documents/Whycantwejustgetalong.pdf

One of the studies (1997) classified White college students on the basis of their self-reported racial attitudes: non-prejudiced about 25%; aversive racists about 40%; prejudiced about 20%; and, could-not-be-clearly-classified about 15%. While those numbers don’t look great, aversive racists are explicitly trying to do the right thing—they’re a good way there. Maybe some of that 15% is working at being in the right place. Let’s keep at it—progress for everybody’s sake.

The studies that support the description of “aversive racism” are enlightening. The assessment of non-verbal behaviour in inter-racial interactions, which are clearly read by sensitized Blacks but often assumed to be old-fashioned racism, will give everyone something to think about.

Dovidio et al found that “Blacks were also less trustful of prejudiced Whites and particularly of aversive racists.” In teams working together those with aversive racists were the least efficient.

The article concludes that “all of the participants in an interaction, Black as well as White, are responsible for the outcomes. Blacks are active participants, and how they react and the actions they take proactively can contribute to more positive race relations.”

It seems clear that if both Whites and Blacks read this article and examined their own perceptions and behaviours, they could perhaps understand more, choose to see some things differently, and progress to more satisfactory outcomes.

Highly recommended.

[Lost in Flatts on 01.11.05 at 12:57]

Guilden,

I normally like reading your posts, as they're a breath of fresh air at least, but a couple of these have been a little bit off.
Theres this one:
"The only thing Renee Web did that was different from what the UBP did for 30 years was vocalise her goals."

Okay, lets logic this out. What the UBP did for 30 years was attempt to maintain power solely among the wealthy whites. Which was a bad thing to do. What Renee Web is doing now is trying to maintain power solely amongst the blacks, which is, am I not wrong, also a bad thing to do. And bad things are well, bad, even if they serve your purpose.

This is a line I'm so sick of hearing, well yeah the PLP are racist, but so were the UBP. Well yeah, they're corrupt, but so were the UBP. That's not a defense. That's stupidity, and a complete failure to address the problem.

Thanks Limey, a very good read, and thanks to Ms. Virgil for her contribution response. CURE is not perfect, but its a step in the right direction. I do wonder how the Asian population of Bermuda feel, they have no representation period. And also, given that whites are now the minority, does this mean affirmative action is actually detrimental to blacks?

My biggest complaint with her comments is around the qualifications claim, saying that companies create some qualifications that are clearly designed to keep out black bermudians. A requirement is just that, a piece of paper you have saying you have the requisite skills to do the job. Why should an employee hire you if they deem these necessary and you don't have them, regardless of your race? If anyone has ever read Ayn Rand, they've seen a good description (fictional obviously) of what happens when the under qualified are given what they want without having to earn it. I feel like Bermudians, often regardless of race, feel like they're owed something by IB's. That they are entitled to things and dont' ahve to work for them. That's not how the business world works, so just get used to it.

[The Limey on 01.11.05 at 13:12]

Apologies for taking so long to reply.

Guilden

However, the PLP has NEVER excluded whites... So for you to equate the PLP with institutional racism is absolutely ridiculous.

Ask yourself why whites haven't joined the PLP in any significant numbers.

Whether accurate or not, there is a perception of the PLP as being hostile to whites. If this is inaccurate, I believe the PLP should be trying to correct that perception, just as some international business are working to correct the perception that they do not help to foster black talent. Overcoming racial inequality requires trust; building that requires both sides to make conciliatory gestures.

Institutional racism does not only refer to deliberate policies of exclusion. Often (and in my opinion, most of the time these days), institutional racism is perpetuated subconsciously, by people who are not bigots. As such, I do not believe it should be considered as an accusatory, perjorative label, which should provoke a defensive reaction in the organisations to which it is applied. Instead, I think it should be considered as a recognition of the existence of a natural dysfunction (a preference for associating with one's own kind), which that organisation can then work to overcome.

CURE encourages international businesses to go out of their way to foster black talent. That's what their annual excellence awards recognise. However, many white people find it difficult to understand why, if traditionally white organisations are expected to make deliberate efforts to overcome their subconscious racial preferences, traditionally black organisations are not expected to do the same. It smacks of double standards and rather than building the trust required for racial reconciliation, erodes it.

silencedogood

Guilden, my interpretation of the Limey's post was that it was ridiculing the excessively broad definition of institutionalized racism.

You misinterpreted me. I was not ridiculing anything.

[The Limey on 01.11.05 at 13:18]

I don't believe Ms. Virgil was saying that job qualifications were always used to exclude blacks or were only used to exclude blacks. I think she was just saying that they could be used as a means to do that, possibly subconsciously. I can't argue with that.

[loki on 01.11.05 at 13:20]

I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a good reason as to why the PLP should not be considered the most institutionally racist organization in Bermuda:

1. Virtually no white members - check
2. No effort made to encourage whites to
join - check
3. Racially provactive and anti-white
rhetoric statements made by party leaders
and MPs - check
4. No attempts made by PLP members,
leadership or MPs to publicly distance
themselves from, or criticize said ant-
white rhetoric - check
5. No white MPs or whites in leadership
positions - check
6. Only white to run as a prospective PLP MP
in 2003 election was placed in Paget
East, where they knew he had no chance of
actually winning his seat - check.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck......you know the rest.

[blovator on 01.11.05 at 14:10]

The PLP reminds me all the time of the republicans. One of the ways is that when they utter some howler like - they are doing something about education or they are not racist - they expect people to believe it and get offended when they don't. When they get offended it looks like they were telling the truth no matter how obvious the lie.

GW is a past master of this. It only works when your opposition is a bunch political slugs like the UBP or the democrats. Without a rigorous opposition its impossible to get away with.

[silencedogood on 01.11.05 at 14:17]

Limey--I stand corrected. "Ridicule" was perhaps a poor word choice.

Lost in flatts--I couldn't agree more with your last line. There are no free lunches in this world. Bermuda is shooting itself in the foot every time someone takes a position out of a sense of entitlement.

I see alot of the things done by government and by employees as abusing the temporary power Bermudians have over IB on the island. Overexerting power depletes its strength. It's a privilege to have IB here but I don't think most treat it as so. It's the whipping boy for social ills and I've seen many employees take it for granted (ex--giving notice and then running out the clock for the next month without doing any work).

Tying into the topic at hand, CURE initiatives may be fine, but if they overexert their authority (which I believe they are inclined to do even if they have not yet done so) and a proportion of the workforce (all races) continues to add less value to the equation, Bermuda will not be a good place to do business. IB will go to Ireland or wherever else that has good tax and regulatory laws outside the US and the price of fishing poles will skyrocket. I think this is a factor in why people are so jumpy about independence and why Ms. Virgil's comment about qualifications and definition of "institutional racism" which does not require any proof are bunk.

[silencedogood on 01.11.05 at 14:25]

blovator--I've heard this opinion before and I honestly don't understand how you come up with that. Is it because the news media that saturates the island portrays Democrats as good and Republicans as evil and you would prefer to be seen as a Democrat? Is it because of Iraq?

The PLP has more in line with the democrats than anyone:
1. a virtual lock on all but a few black votes
2. constantly ridicules blacks who don't vote for them as uncle toms
3. is in favor of affirmative action in all of society and other government interventions to promote black success in addition to (or regardless of (depending on your view)) qualifications
4. has strong labour roots
5. Has complete crackpots at high levels of their party (Howard "heayaaaah" Dean vs. Calvin Smith)

I could go on, but the Limey would probably delete it as off topic. I'm curious on why people feel this way though.

[blovator on 01.11.05 at 15:00]

Silencedogood

All your points are good. I find the quality of governance and procedure, the arrogance and lack of understanding similar in both parties. Of course you are right, the PLP resembles the dems in thier social philosophy.

Item 3 in your list brings you post back on topic.

You:3. is in favor of affirmative action in all of society and other government interventions to promote black success in addition to (or regardless of (depending on your view)) qualifications

ME: I think you are kind to say that what the PLP does is "affirmative action". Certainly I have never heard them use this phrase. Affirmative Action is something I agree with. It is an organized and tranparent attempt to right a social imbalance. Its strategies and methods are published. Its a good idea for a specific period of time. Yes, deserving members of other races may lose out but a real social problem can be partially addressed in this way. Of course, as a program it must end. And in the US it has greatly diminished often because people feel enough has been done.

This is not what the PLP does. The PLP had no organized and transparent Affirmative Action program. As far as I can tell it is disorganized and very opaque. Obviously qualified people suddenly are out of the running for no reason they can understand and less qualified black people get the jobs and everyone starts whispering.

It is an open invitation to corruption. Secrecy is the gasoline that makes corruption burn. And that is exactly what the american Affirmative Action Program was aware of and sought to avoid by being transparent. Companies, government agencies and Academic institutions that pursued it, proclaimed it. If you had a problem with the way you were picked for something, or not, you knew why and who to complain to.

But we don't do that here. The PLP acts without faith.

[44-40 on 01.11.05 at 15:18]

What this island needs is a third party composed of educated middle-class whites and blacks. I would become involved in politics if this happened. This party could fight against the money hungary white aristocracy that runs the UBP and corrupt black racists who run the PLP. If a party like this just won a couple of seats in Parliament it could go along way towards helping the rascism problem.

[Git on 01.11.05 at 15:23]

44-40,

Dilute the opposition vote and you may be looking at another half decade of this BS. Careful what you wish for...

[jake on 01.11.05 at 16:23]

First you say they are anti-white and then you criticize them for running a white candidate in an overwhelmingly white constituency.

loki, I know you believe this stuff at heart, but I think it is sad that you do.

The truth is that there have always been a few brave souls in the white community who have ventured over to the PLP.

The truth is that they were ostracized and rejected by their own community, hence stemming any potential tide.

The truth is that there are some PLP members who would prefer an all black party.

The truth is that they are in a minority, and that most black people have moved on long ago, and want the PLP in place, not as a punishment for whites, but as a protection from the abuses of the past. It may be irrational for those of you who buy into the "new" UBP message, or for whom the black faces in Parliament mean something, but most black Bermudians - without prompting from Ewart Brown or Alex Scott - don't think those guys will give the black population a fair deal. That is why they return the PLP to Government.

Your comments about black leadership being crackpots and similar comments from others like corrupt black racists help only to reinforce the mistrust.

It is over-the-top and only seems normal in the company of other likeminded people on this anonymous weblog.

Until you stop painting us all with the same brush it is empty to ask us to do the same.

[44-40 on 01.11.05 at 16:23]

You have to start somewhere, mate.

[silencedogood on 01.11.05 at 16:33]

It is over-the-top and only seems normal in the company of other likeminded people on this anonymous weblog.
Posted by jake on 01.11.05 at 16:23

If this was a shot at me, I would clarify that I stated Calvin Smith is a crackpot who is in the PLP leadership, not all their leaders. I stand by that. Independence + WWII comparisons = crackpot in my book.

[blovator on 01.11.05 at 16:41]

One thing should be said - the CURE statement that Limey posted is an unussually careful and useful document. Its definitions are clear and on the whole its assesments are correct. I would quible with some of its assumptions but for a government document it is remarkably informative. Its not badly written either.

[loki on 01.11.05 at 17:16]

"Your comments about black leadership being crackpots......"

I have said no such thing - that was someone else.

"Until you stop painting us all with the same brush it is empty to ask us to do the same."

I am not for a second suggesting that all PLP members are bigots. Far from it, in fact. I am saying that the PLP is an institutionally racist organization, which it is. If any corporate institution had the exact opposite racial make-up of the PLP and similar publicly expressed sentiments by those at the top of the hierarchy (and a complete lack of publicly expressed dissent by those lower down the hierarchy), that organization would be rightly accused of being institutionally racist.

"First you say they are anti-white and then you criticize them for running a white candidate in an overwhelmingly white constituency."

If they were serious about integrating the party, why would they put their only white candidate in a constituency where no PLP candidate would ever win, given the PLP leadership's anti-white rhetoric, and the overwhelmingly white population of the constituency in question?

[loki on 01.11.05 at 17:29]

Jake, I should add that my opinion of the PLP as an institutionally racist organization is of relatively recent vintage. I do believe that the current hierarchy and, to a lesser extent, the hierarchy in place from 1997-2003, is responsible for the attitude of most whites towards the PLP. I certainly don't recall racially inflammatory and divisive tactics being employed in the Freddie Wade era of the PLP. Mr Wade struck me as a decent and principled man, genuinely concerned about social justice and racial equality. From what I know of the man (and I don't pretend to be an expert, by any means), I would bet that he'd be appalled at the power-hungry, racially divisive and self-interested culture that seems to dominate the upper hierarchy of the PLP these days. In all honesty, can you imagine Freddie Wade employing the kind of disgusting tactics and vile racial rhetoric employed by the PLP of late?

[It Doesn't Matter on 01.11.05 at 17:37]

This thread has become 'funny reading'.
If you all would admit that the economic foundation in Bermuda is inherently racist in its structure, management and organization; if you all would admit that it is harder for black men, in particular, to become successful in Bermuda because of the numerous hurdles placed in that man's way; then I would be happy to say (if only for your benefit) that the PLP is an institutionally racist organization.

No harm no foul.

I've noticed Bermuda's latest trend: suggesting that whites are being oppressed by blacks. For some time that has been the focus on this site, as well as in other parts of the Island.

You can't deny that institutional racism exist. You can't deny it because you claim the PLP is an institutionally racist organization.

I think many people need to reach for their dictionaries.

[Nicolette on 01.11.05 at 17:54]

"You can't deny that institutional racism exist. You can't deny it because you claim the PLP is an institutionally racist organization." - while entreating others to check their dictionaries, perhaps you could squeeze in a little logic lesson.

Institutional racsim has nothing to do with how you "brand" the PLP. Back to school for you!

[The Limey on 01.11.05 at 17:56]

jake

The truth is that they were ostracized and rejected by their own community, hence stemming any potential tide.

Speaking for myself, even if I shared the ideology of the PLP, the biggest reason I would not join them is because of my perception of their hostility to whites. It would not be because of what my friends, family or other whites would say.

The truth is that they are in a minority, and that most black people have moved on long ago, and want the PLP in place, not as a punishment for whites, but as a protection from the abuses of the past.

Who is perceived as perpetrating those abuses: whites, or members of the UBP?

If the former, does this mean, then, that only certain whites (those perceived as wanting nothing to do with the abuses of the past) would be welcomed in the PLP? If so, who would be welcomed and who would not?

If the latter, why are the PLP not trying to recruit those whites who have no association with the UBP?

Where, for example, is the white working class Portuguese representation in the PLP?

silencedogood

I don't believe Calvin Smith is in the PLP leadership any more, is he?

All

I don't want this thread to bog down in a discussion of institutional racism in the PLP. Other institutions are also affected, e.g. the education system. Let's talk about them too.

[Nicolette on 01.11.05 at 17:58]

And, what's more - of course institutional racism exists as does institutionalized sexism and reverse discrimination in Bermuda to greater or lesser extents. We have come a long way and are far, far better positioned in many of these areas than other "civilized" nations - to say we have made no progress and that nothing has changed or to blame all failures on the possibility of discrimination is a slap in the face to every civil rights leader, every leader since MLK had a dream.

[The Limey on 01.11.05 at 18:06]

It Doesn't Matter

This is not a zero sum game.

I don't think most people here are denying that institutional racism against blacks exists. I know that in recent weeks, since watching Crash and listening to Tim Wise, I have become more conscious of the mechanisms by which institutional racism is perpetuated. But I do believe it's mostly subtle and subconscious.

In contrast, the institutional racism I see in the PLP is more overt and deliberate.

But perhaps that's because I am white. Perhaps you see things the other way round.

[loki on 01.11.05 at 18:10]

"All

I don't want this thread to bog down in a discussion of institutional racism in the PLP. Other institutions are also affected, e.g. the education system. Let's talk about them too."

I agree, but I think the point is that whites wouldn't have quite the kneejerk reaction to discussing racism (institutional or otherwise) directed towards blacks, if there was any sincere acknowledgement of racism directed towards whites. For instance, it's difficult for me to take the PLPs pronouncements on race terribly seriously when I view them as being incredibly institutionally racist. Similarly, I have been the victim of overt racism (rather than institutional racism), in that I was hounded out of a job by a black office manager who made no bones about the fact that she wanted to remove all the whites in favour of blacks. Does this happen to blacks? Certainly, but don't pretend that the white population has the monopoly of vile behaviour and bigotry.

[blovator on 01.11.05 at 18:12]

It Doesn't Matter

There can be no doubt that there is institutional racism in Bermuda. This effects both white and black. Niether the PLP nor the UBP has made any attempt to formulate a program of action to address the issue. They are quite pathetic.

As for blacks, no institutional racism is as glaring, embarrasing and disgusting as the education system. The UBP severely damaged the dept of ed, bloated it and left it without a national agenda or purpose. It is 25% more expensive than private education.

The lower classes were to embrase the destiny thier lesser education set for them. The rich would go to private schools. This policy was confirmed by the actions of MPs themselves when they declined to enroll thier children in the schools they with apparent pride, bestowed on the public. Since most people in the lower classes are black - according to the CURE definition - this is instititional racism.

The PLP has pretty much left the educational system as they found it. Draw whatever meaning you wish from that.

The real fault is that of the Bermudian voting public of all races and all classes. Public education simply is not important to them. Even when they pay 25-100% more for what they get and what they get is lousy. How can you expect politicians to care if Bermudians in the main, don't.

[blovator on 01.11.05 at 18:13]

BTW - I use the CURE definition of institutional racism without irony. I think its pretty good.

[The Limey on 01.11.05 at 18:20]

I'd like to thank Myra Virgil for making an electronic copy of the "From Survey To Practice" document referenced above available to me. You can download it here.

The 15 recommendations referred to by Ms. Virgil can be found on pages 14-15. They are as follows:

1) Industry umbrella groups should play a greater role in heightening awareness about careers and jobs in their respective industries. Secondary students entering the job market must be made aware of the fields that are available in Bermuda. Publications such as the Annual Employment Survey can assist secondary students with career choices, needs and job availability and therefore should be distributed.

2) Companies need to conduct qualitative surveys of employee perceptions. They need to understand what the employees think of the organization, its policies on racial diversity, and fair access to opportunity. This process is a critical step towards practicing equality of opportunity.

3) A database of current and future job seekers (students studying locally and abroad) could be devised as a human resource tool and resource for job seekers.

4) Current equality of opportunity practices, directions for improving racial representation and fair access commitments must be documented and communicated to all employees. Every employee should be aware of where the company stands and where the company is heading, on equality of opportunity as a whole and race equity specifically.

5) Companies that recognize that there is a shortage of qualified individuals in a particular field need to convey this message to the Department of Education so that current students who will enter the labor market in the future are aware of the opportunities and where they are most needed.

6) Counselors must work with students who will be entering the labor market train them on how to conduct themselves professionally and teach them the interviewing skills needed to get the “job”.

7) Employers should conduct exit interviews 6 months to a year after an individual leaves (rather than at the same time as their departure) their employment - employees who leave are not likely to be frank about their reasons for leaving if they are dependent on references and preserving good relationships. In exit or post-employment interviews, instead of asking, “Why are you leaving?” ask, “What made you think about leaving”.

8) Managers and Supervisors should be evaluated on the basis of how well they have managed diversity and contributed to the recruitment, promotion and retention of Bermudians, on a whole, and Black Bermudians, specifically. They must be made to account for how they manage and promote successful relationships with people of different races - specifically their relationships with employees and between employees. Most businesses will agree that if there is no form of evaluation of individual efforts to promote equality of opportunity; very few will make it a priority. Even if a Manager were doing very little to promote racial equality, if this person knew they were going to have to report on and document their initiatives, he or she would be more likely to take positive action.

9) Greater emphasis should be placed on training for students who are more inclined to a “technical” curriculum. Bermuda continues to have a great need for students trained in the trades (carpentry, masonry, drafting, etc.).

10) Employers should aim to establish an internal Equality of Opportunity/ Code of Practice Advisory Committee to include Executive, Managerial and Operational employees from across the organisation. The members would be responsible for establishing the organization’s starting point, reviewing procedures, educating on discrimination, its manifestations and outcomes, and monitoring the progress in achieving the objective of representation.

11) Employers must ensure that they have drawn up clear and justifiable job criteria, which are demonstrably objective and job-related. The job criteria should not change when a position becomes available and there should be no clear link between the required experience for a post and the resumes of select individuals.

12) Rewards and recognition incentives can be put in place for those who facilitate the valuing diversity and the demonstration of cultural competence.

13) Employers may offer pre-employment training, where appropriate, to prepare potential job applicants for selection tests and interviews.

14) Employers should also consider special programmes and positive action training to help employees, less represented in the organisation, or from disadvantaged groups, to apply for jobs and to take on tasks in areas where they are underrepresented. This might mean selecting Bermudians for augmented training and experience in overseas offices and training facilities. These opportunities should be consistently offered with the intent of bringing Bermudians back to Bermuda to take on true leadership roles and commensurate tasks. Some employers have already implemented such programs and report great success.

15) More emphasis needs to be placed on the cost of retention and local recruitment versus oversees recruitment. This attention includes reviewing salaries to ensure that they reflect market. There may be room for employers to reward their local employees better, for there have been some reports that newcomers to positions garner better compensation packages than longer term employees, simply as a consequence of oversight of the current-day salary levels.

[SmokingGun on 01.11.05 at 18:37]

Unfortunately Limey the whole issue of IR is something that is very much at a point where it needs to be addressed in many various institutes and environments. The whole gist of "subtle" implementation is very true. It's there, it's everywhere. We all are guilty of supporting it and we are all victims of it. Wether we know of it, like it, dis-like it or are just plain oblivious to it.

As in all matters in life, there has to be some sort of accountability. If Bermuda truly wants to move in the direction of destroying IR then the very people that must lead the way must live, breath and spend every day showing they are willing to abide by the same rules. If the PLP is the current leadership of Bermuda then they must lead the way. It all starts at the top.

The trouble is it is a double edged sword because now that the shoe is on the other foot so to speak, can the current and new generations of Black Bermudian's resist the temptation of being exclusionary as they change policy or re-write laws. Or do they really not think they have reached any sort of real equality as of yet. In my opinion IR will be around in it's subtle form for many years to come but as long as people are willing to look around and ask why then one day at a time we might make some serious head way against it.

And as has been said, no-one owes a Bermudian anything just because they are Bermudian. Black, White or anything in between. We still have to work hard and prove ourselves as individuals and if it's a labour issue it should go to the labour board, not CURE.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 01.11.05 at 18:37]

Limey,

"Ask yourself why whites haven't joined the PLP in any significant numbers.

Whether accurate or not, there is a perception of the PLP as being hostile to whites. If this is inaccurate, I believe the PLP should be trying to correct that perception..."

Whites have not joined the PLP in any significant way because the PLP is perceived to be a black party. Further, history has shown that when whites do join the PLP they are questioned by their racial peers for their actions. That in itself lends to part of the perception of the PLP being hostile toward whites.

The fact is, the PLP does not have a closed door policy regarding any race. The same perception was once held for many of the dinghy clubs in Bermuda but the perception of many of them changed when blacks who were interested applied for membership and were accepted. The clubs themselves did not change but the perception changed because those of colour who were interested joined they found the perceptions to be just that perceptions.

Most, sorry, many whites are not interested is trying to understand the PLP philosophy so they choose to stay away. Many whites do not want te perceptions they hold of the PLP to change and they perpatuate tat in their discussions about the PLP.

I would be the first to agree that the PLP has made some mistakes, some of them stupid mistakes, however, since they have been the government the historical conservative nature of Bermuda has not changed, which says that the policies of the PLP are not that much different from those of the UBP. However, there are still those who have a perception that things have changed drastically.

That being said, most of the perception of the PLP being hostile toward whites is due to the race of its MPs. But if whites refuse to participate in the PLP the only faces you will see are black faces because in order to have any success a political party must present candidates during elections.

Sure, some of the parties MPs and supporters have made what could be cassified as racist statements but these comments do not represent the party as a whole. For example, am a supporter of the PLP but I don't think I show any signs of being hostile toward whites.

Sometimes if you want to see change you have to create change not sit idly by hoping change will occur. If whites decided to join the PLP they would be welcomed with open arms just as the few who have done so have been.

[blovator on 01.11.05 at 18:51]

GG

you clearly do not live in Bermuda, am I right? Do you know people in the PLP? Have you heard them talk? I don't think you are talking about the same PLP I know.

[Rev. Goat on 01.11.05 at 19:45]

GG, you are living in La la land mate. Is your memory so short you can't even remeber what the Premiere said last month. I do believe he was "sick" of whites. Don't you remeber Renee Webs "look like me" remark. Open arms my ASS!

[Full Fullish on 01.11.05 at 19:49]

Guilden -
I think the point isn't that white people aren't going out of their way to join, it's that the PLP aren't doing anything to try and promote white participation. You go on about instatutionalised racism, well sir, here is the first example (From the description of the cure reply above) that I've seen. The PLP is the first place that I can point to and say without a doubt "Here is a prime example of instatutuinalised racism". Ironically (A word that "P" has been using a lot lately) it's not a white establisment.

[Rincewind on 01.11.05 at 20:07]

"That being said, most of the perception of the PLP being hostile toward whites is due to the race of its MPs"

Damn and here I was thinking it was because of some of the things they said.

[Guilden M. Gilbert, Jr. on 01.11.05 at 20:30]

Rincewind,

Whites not joining the PLP did not start with the current leadership. From its inception whites have not joined the PLP. Whites calling the PLP a racist organisation is nothing new. Blame Alex and Co. all you want but let's look at the history of white membership in the PLP when trying to find the reason why there so few white faces in the party.

Blovator,

I do not need to live in Bermuda to know that historically whites have shown no interest in joining the PLP. Being born and raised in Bermuda in a politically aware home I have followed Bermuda's political landscape for many years.

[Rincewind on 01.11.05 at 20:49]

Guilden,

why is it the PLP doesn't make itself available to all Bdians? How do they encourage racial unity? The history of the island should not continually affect us now aren't we supposed to learn from past mistakes? What the current leadership of the PLP does affects us now, so in what ways do they try to recruit new white members? What do their actions and comments say to BERMUDIANS NOW?

[blovator on 01.11.05 at 21:01]

Limey

I tryed to get it on to education. I tryed. GG put it back on the PLP. I swear.

[Nicolette on 01.11.05 at 21:26]

Thanks for publishing the 15 reommendations, Phil.

After reading the comments on this thread though it appears that little of the valid message that the excerpts provided to us via Phil and Ms Vigil has been digested. Instead this has become a repetitive rendering of the bleeding obvious. Without doubt and imagination one can safely point accusing fingers at the one blatant example of black IR - namely the PLP. What is far more challenging and productive is for me look to those institutions that I grew up in, became members of and worked in (and in some cases still do) to see the more subtle, but no less destructive propagation of white preference. How useful and even valid is it to flog a horse that died long ago while leaving its fetid smell...

There's a far deeper issue being discussed here that asks us to look into our hearts, minds and institutions and see where we can make a change to foster a more level playing field and ultimately a better place to live and raise children who naturally embrace diversity and not fear it - where neither colour, race or sex determine who has power and who does not. IMO, many members of our current government are simply behaving like the racists they used to and still do denounce - perhaps believing they are justified in doing so to somewhat make up for past injustices. Does that make it right or fair - hell no. But, when you look over time we should not be all that surpised as, after all, very very few individuals who have gone down in history as true champions of beneficial change, the "saints" and role models of the past - well, they weren't politicians.

[Turtle on 01.11.05 at 21:47]

Well said Nicolette.

Pay attention, you lot!

[silencedogood on 02.11.05 at 12:08]

silencedogood, I don't believe Calvin Smith is in the PLP leadership any more, is he?
Posted by: The Limey | 01 November 2005 at 21:56

Limey--I'm not chained to titles. If a person is perceived as speaking for a significant proportion of a party, officially or no, I consider them to be at a minimum an ideological leader.

Calvin Smith is in the RG beating the drum for independence and serving a function for Alex Scott and the PLP leadership who have echoed many of the same types of comments in regard to independence. Possibly less to no control over the content of his message, but I consider him a leader nonetheless.

It works both ways, I would consider John Swan to still be an ideological leader of the UBP because many recognize him as such and when he speaks, they listen. The fact he holds no official post only relates to how much weight you give to his comments when attributing them to the party at large.