The discrimination against Blacks in the US - Research Paper Example

Discrimination- direct and indirect When one point out that discrimination is human rights’ violation, others may laugh because social development through ages did not prevent the rapid growth and spread of discriminative thought in human mind. For instance, in the US society, one can see color discrimination against African Americans. The US policy on nuclear bombs, discrimination against Muslim women in France on wearing veils, the gender discrimination that women face in Saudi Arabia etc are burning issues on discrimination. Thesis statement: Why the discrimination based on color, wanting of nuclear bombs, religious discrimination, and gender discrimination is unscrupulous, its consequences and what is to be done to correct the same? Is discrimination against blacks in the US against human rights? The discrimination against African Americans in America is a burning issue. One cannot neglect the seriousness of discrimination based on racism against blacks in a multiracial, multilingual and multicultural society. The Civil War was an innovative movement which aimed to eradicate racism or discrimination in America. But still discrimination against blacks based on racial feeling prevails. The Colfax massacre in 1873 and Coushatta massacre in 1874, in which thousands of African Americans were brutally murdered prove that the American society still show discrimination against blacks. Assimilating a race into the society and showing discrimination is not fair for a developed society like America. When America is discriminating the blacks, their contribution/service provided at the time of World War I and World War II is ignored. The discrimination against backs is unethical and immoral. Discrimination based on caste, color or creed is a serious violation of human rights because it is against human dignity. But it can be corrected by reconsidering the age old prejudice against blacks. Besides, it will badly affect the reputation of the American society as a multiracial society which is capable to assimilate different types of races into the mainstream. Is the US policy on nuclear bombs morally right or wrong? The nuclear weapon policy of the United States attracts much criticism from other nations because it seems to hinder global peace and security. From one side, the United States is trying to sustain its nuclear bombs/weapons. On the other side, it is trying to blame other nations for keeping nuclear weapons. A nation, protecting a number of nuclear weapons and blaming other nations on keeping the same makes the whole world to reconsider their nuclear policies. Schwartz (1998), in the work -‘Atomic audit: the costs and consequences of U.S. nuclear weapons since 1940’, makes clear the nuclear policy adopted by the US government resulted in bitter relations with some of its close allies (p.474). One can argue that nothing can be done with nuclear bombs, which was the product of Cold War with the USSR. But now, the situation is different and it is the responsibility of the United States to change its nuclear policy. For instance, the United States signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) but is not yet ready to approve the same. From another angle of view, a code of conduct for the whole world but not applicable to the United States is illegal and immoral. The American policy on nuclear weapons is against world peace because it encourages other nations to follow the same code of conduct. Besides, this may result in large scale production and unsystematic usage of nuclear bombs during wars. So, the United States must take initiative to reduce its collection of nuclear bombs. Then only it can force other nations to reduce the same. As a superpower, it is the responsibility of the United States to change its nuclear policy. So, the US policy on nuclear bombs is morally wrong and a double game. Is the discrimination against Muslim women who wear veils in France right or wrong? The initiative against Muslim women wearing veils began in Venissieux, France. The mayor of Venissieux, André Gerin put forth a proposal to ban increased usage of veils among Muslim women. Besides, France is the Western European country with biggest Muslim population. But from the side of the secular republic government, the ban is not against human rights. It is the responsibility of the secular republic government to consider its citizens as equal. When a group of people thinks that they are different from others and are in need of special rights within a secular republic, the situation becomes worse. But from the perspective of human rights groups, the ban on Muslim women wearing veils is considered as violation of human rights or discrimination. But Frances 2004 law, which bans headscarves or other religious symbols at schools, must not be considered as violation of human rights because the usage of religious symbols at schools may instill hatred in the mind of other students. From the perspective of a religious person and human rights groups, the ban is against religious beliefs and violation of human rights. But from the perspective of a liberal individual or secular republic government, the ban provides equal rights to all, without discrimination. The ban on Muslim women wearing veils in France will result in human rights violation on religious belief. But the Muslim women must consider the fact that it is their duty and responsibility to be the part of the French society, not as a separate group. Then only the problem will be solved without further issues on the same. Is the gender discrimination against women in Saudi Arabia morally right? First of all, Saudi Arabia is a Middle Eastern country which strictly follows the principles of Islam. In 2000, the Amnesty International launched a campaign against the increased number of human rights breach which aimed Saudi Arabia. The current laws in Saudi Arabia do not protect the rights of women. Instead, it binds women to their private domain of family life and does not allow them to be in the public domain of the Saudi society. Almost all laws show discrimination against women by hindering them from decision making processes and social relationships. So, the gender discrimination against women in Saudi Arabia is not legally and morally right. It is wrong because the society does not have the right to show discrimination against women. This will reduce dignity of women in the society and their contribution to social development will become marginal. So, it is the responsibility of the Saudi government and religious leaders to reconsider their policy on women folk. Then only the problem will be resolved and the women will regain their rights in private and public domains in Saudi society. Summing, one can see that discrimination against blacks in US is the violation of human rights. Besides, the US policy on nuclear bombs is morally wrong and a double game to keep nuclear weapons and to blame other nations for the same. The discrimination against women who wear veils in France is not an important issue but is the violation of individual right in a secular republic. In addition, the gender discrimination against women in Saudi Arabia is not legally and morally right, but the best example of discrimination against women in the Middle East. References Schwartz, S.I. (1998). Atomic audit: the costs and consequences of U.S. nuclear weapons since 1940. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Read More