That would be the country with only one race.
The problem is that while we might not confuse the two things, people do confuse them, and talk about Scandinavians, Slavic peoples, Japanese, and Native Americans, etc., as “races”. So for me, Chinese disciminating against Japanese, or Icelanders discriminating against Slavic people, is racism, even though no biologist would put the disciminators and the discriminees into separate races.
A country that excludes all other races and refuses to do business with other races is the least racist in your opinion?
Understood, but there IS an important difference there. Being ethnocentric or nationalist is based on cultural lines, not physical ones. The Icelanders aren’t being racist because they do not believe that Poles are criminal because of their biology; but rather their economic status and cultural traditions; not to mention their rather limited and not entirely positive experience with them recently. They are annoyed with them because of their unwillingness to assimilate, and not unfairly view them with a bit of suspicion. It’s important not to throw the racist card around lightly and inappropriately. It does disservice to those actually discriminated on basis of race.
My father is of Slavic descent. He and his family call themselves “Russian”. When they immigrated it WAS Russia. Now it’s Poland. Is he Polish or Russian? And is there any difference other than minor cultural ones?
I’m not sure what your point is here.
Australia has a problem with racism against its Aboriginal population to a degree that makes it very unlikely to be the least racist country in the world.
Whenever we do ad projects for Singapore, the one instruction we always get from the clients wrt models is “no blacks, no Indians.”
I will go along with the OP I think Australians, in general, display very little racism. Sure there are idiots here but they are a small minority.
Having lived in London for a couple of years I find it very amusing that the English have the hide to lecture anyone about racial tolerance, or tolerance of any kind.
I work in a small team. We have 1 lebanese, 1 syrian, 1 indian, 1 argentinian, 2 vietnamese and 7 WASPS. I hear the odd racist comment at work but it is never the WASPS making them.
It is almost a standing joke, in fact a staple of ethnic comics in Australia, that the most racially divisive people in Australia are the members of other ethnic groups.
It’s perhaps also misleading to talk about nations’ levels of racism, as though it’s equally spread throughout society.
There are areas of the UK where the is deep racism, but equally there are happily multicultural areas where we all rub along nicely.
Similarly, within a set geographic area different communities will display different attitudes.
The Aussie posters who’ve described their experiences here may not work with a fully representative cross-section of society?
I’m not sure anyone is lecturing… just pointing out that Australia is not the epitome of racial harmony the OP suggests.
The only thing I am questioning is the claim that Australia is the least racist nation in the world… the fact that the UK is worse is neither here nor there. :rolleyes:
Which doesn’t mean that the nation is not racist… just that Whites ain’t the biggest culprits.
You seem to have undermined your own argument there?
That would seem to be contradicted by everything I have ever heard about Japan regarding racism.
The peculiar institution was that slavery and race were equated, directly. While other places imported Africans to use as slaves, nothing equated slavery and race. A slave who obtained freedom could move up in the world, (with some social constraints), but that person and his or her children were not considered slave material. In the U.S., a number of states, for example, passed laws that any black person who could not provide documents proving their freedom could be siezed as a presumed runaway slave and sold at auction. The de facto and even de jure presumption was that black skin indicated slavery.