Prejudice and Discrimination - Essay Example

Prejudice and Discrimination Introduction Prejudice is a cultural attitude towards a group of individuals based on prejudgement and negative stereotypes because of their religious, cultural, ethnic or racial orientations. The stereotype against a group is based on the views that perpetrators have concerning certain beliefs, attitudes and practices that the targeted groups are characterized with. Prejudice is exercised both at an individual and institutional levels where the level of tolerance exercised by perpetrators will depend on the depth of perception of the effects the beliefs, attitude and practices have on the society. In many cases, prejudice remains dormant for some time until the concerned groups confronts each other in an angry exchange exposing the underlying outright hatred (Fiske, 2000). On the other hand, discrimination has been identified under international law as any difference in treatment of an individual or group of individuals based on an outlawed ground that lacks any objective and sensible justification. Discrimination of individuals works to hamper them from exercising given human rights on an equivalent origin comprising the right to highest achievable standard of health, the right to work, freedom of expression, religion or belief and the right to education. International laws identify both direct and indirect forms f discrimination of particular groups with indirect discrimination occurring in situations when a supposedly procedure, neutral law, or practice ends up creating a disproportionate environment for, or has a dissimilar impact on a group in society without any objective or reasonable justification. There are certain grounds on which discrimination can be considered as having an objective or reasonable justification if undertaken based on legitimate reasons that are attuned with the human rights responsibility of state institutions. Legitimate claims for discrimination have been limited to social aspects related to public health, security of the larger society, or promotion of public policy issue such as health and safety. However, any difference in treatment exercised against a group can only qualify as reasonable and objective when it is balances the gains from objectives it aims to achieve (Amnesty International, 2012). Impact of Prejudice and Discrimination on Overall International Peace and Security As seen from the above discussion of what prejudice and discrimination entails, the two pose great danger to any social organization both in the community, national and the international contexts. Among the areas that prejudice and discrimination has an impact on is that of international peace and security. The impact of prejudice and discrimination on international peace and security can be understood in terms the need to integrate the society. International peace and security is as a result of embracing an integrative approach towards relationship with all states and groups regardless of their beliefs, attitudes and practices. Integrative approach to world peace and security involves looking beyond certain areas of uniqueness and differences to engage in constructive affairs which benefit all the parties involved either economically or technologically through exchanging of physical materials and ideals. However, prejudice and discrimination represents negative manifestations of integrative power since instead of bringing or holding people together the two pulls them apart based on the identified differences. Prejudice and discrimination provides a ground for the development of "disintegrative power" which is accomplished through fear, hatred, and the threat of a common enemy (Jacques 2009, p. 40). The consequence of such perceptions is formation of a negative identity seen in the formation of groups based on definitions in terms of what the group is not such as in military patriotism, in nationalism. The formation of groups based on given identities lead to confrontations with members having us against them mentality leading to "pathological situation of internal violence" (Jacques 2009, p.41). When such violence occurs on a large scale, it becomes destructive as seen in the Balkans, Sri Lanka, Somalia and Middle East. Another impact of prejudice and discrimination is the polarization of the groups involved in a given situation. Polarization occurs when people, groups and states that previously had a neutral stance on a conflict take sides by offering support or condemning one of the parties in the conflict. Continued polarization results in a situation where the international community supporting either take increasingly extreme positions thereby intensifying their opposition to each other. Polarization is a stage in conflict escalation that could potentially lead to segregation which is characterized by competition and hostility that endangers the parties basic needs. Without instituting an international intervention, the situation can further escalate to a situation where the involved parties goals cease to be winning, and instead becomes destroying the other (Leung, Chiu and Hong, 2011). Implications for Progressing In Relation To Human Rights The realization that prejudice and discrimination presents a danger to coexistence calls for the introduction of measures to curtail the propagation of these practices in society. One of the areas that needs keen focus towards is the human rights of the disadvantaged or minority groups such as refugees, women, the disabled, members of a given faith or religion among others. A greater challenge in protecting the human rights of victims of prejudice and discrimination is instituting capable international instruments to protect people against prejudice and discrimination. Presently, existing international institutions do not have the capacity to ensure they are universally followed or even implemented (Oberleitner, 2013). There have been situations where a minority group has continued to face prejudice and discrimination in the full knowledge of international states and organizations without the necessary interventions being made (Amnesty International, 2012). This is especially true in situations where the majority party or the government fail to recognize the role played by important international institutions such as the UNHCR in guaranteeing the rights of the victims. An example of the effect of such a situation in the case of refugees is the continued linkage of Islam with terrorism which makes refugees of the same faith being seen as terrorists by locals. A report published by Amnesty International identifies the continued rise of anti-Islamic sentiments in European countries such as Denmark, Austria, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Italy and Norway. This the report notes is due to the increased power given to parties that are instrumental in creating anxiety and disenchantment in the public by identifying Islam as the “most significant enemy” (Amnesty International 2012, p. 15). Such parties have the aim of halting what is thought as “Islamization of Europe” by campaigning on a political platform aimed at restricting immigration of Islamic refugees into the country. The realization of the extent of prejudice and discrimination in society calls for introduction of policies to reverse ongoing situation both at the national and international levels. Such policies should aim at establishing proportionality between generally applicable rules on majority rights and minority privileges. The way forward should also factor the need for consensus between conflicting groups by promoting cultural autonomy of each party, effective decentralization of institutions and community resources and when necessary, territorial autonomy for minority groups (Harris, Shah and Sivakumaran, 2013). In reacting to the need for protection of minority rights, the international community have in recent years initiated mechanisms to help define more clearly the rights of minority groups through global norms in a number of guidelines, human rights treaties and conventions. Embracing the rights of minority groups has become an essential component of international treaty as seen in the current European Union requirement that “stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities” be part of the necessary accomplishments for a state to join the union (Matlary 2002, p.77). What are the implications relating to future violent conflicts? Having experienced the consequences of prejudice and discrimination on peaceful coexistence between various groups, there is the need for interventions based on mechanisms that promote conflict prevention, peace building and conflict resolution with the aim of creating future stability. Interventions that focus on conflict prevention involve predicting future conflict before it happens with a view of implementing suitable mechanisms to prevent the potential outbreak of violence. Peace building on the other hand involves the creation of mechanisms to address the “structural issues and the long-term relationship” held by the conflicting groups (Ramsbotham, Woodhouse and Miall 2005, p. 30.). The process of peace building focuses on ending the differences that bring about conflicts with the aim of realigning contradictions at the root of a conflict. Conflict resolution involves facilitating direct engagement between conflicting parties with the result being breaking of past cycle of violence. The three approaches to conflict resolution present essential avenues for handling future violent conflicts. Although peace researchers widely agree that conflict prevention, conflict resolution and peace building are intertwined in their application to conflicts, it is necessary that a line is drawn to separate the three in order to find potential points of intervention. Based on this line of thought, there has been an increased in the number of researchers who feel that violence has to end before initiating peace building efforts. However, there are also those who feel peace building is the only process that can bring to an end protracted violent conflicts and prevent possible future conflicts breaking out between groups (Ramsbothem, Woodhouse and Miall, 2005). Examples of successful peace building initiative include achievement in countries such as Kosovo, Cambodia, Bosnia, Afghanistan, East Timor, Iraq and Sierra Leone. This area of achievement has informed the formation of UN Peacebuilding Commission in 2005 whose role is to ensure future sustainable peace (Chinkin and Charlesworth, 2006). Chinkin and Charlesworth (2006) notes peace building should be explored as the best approach to end future violent conflicts. The authors note that since peace building includes marginalized groups such as women into the process, it improves the chances of maintaining peaceful coexistence. Interventions into the Causes and Consequences of Prejudice and Discrimination Elimination of prejudice and discrimination calls for the establishment of a broader and deeper foundation of moderation of interactions which should be rooted in informal political institutions and social organizations. This is because prejudice and discrimination are in most cases deeply entrenched into the lives of the groups to an extent that eradication is only possible when the people’s outlook is transformed. This intervention works in three ways by firstly factoring various interests held by the conflicting groups into the benefits of sustainable peace. To merge the interests of different groups call for introduction of institutionalized cooperation between involved communal groups in order to develop trust between the conflicting groups (Tetlock and Mitchell, 2009). Secondly, the established interaction of the social organizations will allow for the creation of mechanisms to monitor and oversee members who violate social and organizational norms while also proposing the necessary intervention for those who propagate discrimination or prejudiced behaviour. In the long run, this approach will ensure the cultivation of new tolerance across lines of conflict. Lastly, empowering civic groups to deal with prejudice and discrimination within their society of operation can be an effective measure in ending the practice since they are essential agents of socialization. These measures work with higher efficiency considering their concentration on grassroots causes of existing conflict. They therefore, work to reconcile the conflicting groups by targeting existing areas of attitude and beliefs which motivate ongoing conflicts. At the national and international level, there is need for the introduction of legislations to penalise discrimination of particular groups. The laws exercised at the national level will need to be reviewed and incorporated into existing principles and guidelines contained international instruments prohibiting all forms of prejudice and discrimination (Harris, Shah and Sivakumaran, 2013). Conclusion The foregoing essay has explored the impact of prejudice and discrimination in society. Prejudice and discrimination works against efforts to establish an integrative society due to the formation of groups that cannot cooperate in positive socials engagements due to mistrust based on the different often conflicting values held by each group. Escalation of the existing differences has been found to have implications in the way human rights are exercised in the society. The abuse of human rights due to prejudice and discrimination call interventions aimed at developing capacity necessary for the adoption mechanism to protect the universal rights of a minority group. Effective methods to combat prejudiced and discrimination have been found to be those that focus at the grassroots levels since they allow for development of closer social ties. References Amnesty International, 2012. Choice and prejudice discrimination against Muslims in Europe. London: Amnesty International Ltd. Matlary, J. H., 2002. Intervention for human rights in Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Chinkin, C., & Charlesworth, H. 2006. Building women into peace: The international legal framework. Third World Quarterly, 27(5), 937-957. Fiske, S. T. (2000). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination at the seam between the centuries: Evolution, culture, mind, and brain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30(3), 299-322. Harris, D., Shah, M. and Sivakumaran, S. (Eds.). 2013. International human rights law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jacques, J. (2009). Man and His Actions. London: AuthorHouse. Leung, A. K. Y., Chiu, C. Y., & Hong, Y. Y. (Eds.). 2011. Cultural processes: A social psychological perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ramsbotham, O., Miall, H., & Woodhouse, T. 2005. Contemporary conflict resolution. Cambridge: Polity. Tetlock, P. E., & Mitchell, G. 2009. Implicit bias and accountability systems: What must organizations do to prevent discrimination? Research in organizational behavior, 29, 3-38. Oberleitner, G. 2013. Global Human Rights Institutions. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Read More