Justice & Equality

Australians have an opportunity in an upcoming constitutional referendum to righteously shout loudly "I am not a racist" by voting for a proposition that, at its core, is fundamentally racist and divisive, but still might work. Is discrimination on the basis of race acceptable when it's to enable affirmative action, and could many "yes" voters also be racist? This is a deeper look trying to see each side from the perspective of the other, with the reality that both sides have a point. Perhaps it little more work could bring things together.

A quick internet search with the keywords 'lead crime' in the search bar will reveal many articles which all propose that lead pollution in the air caused a dramatic increase in violent crime. Any victim of violent crime in affected locations has a right to feel disturbed by this, but what about perpetrators of violent crime, and should society share the guilt?

Around the world, many countries have both a battle with equality for some racial groups and minorities and also a battle with crime-rates within and by those same groups. Should we consider crime rates the real sentinels of problems and a solution require focusing on factors behind crime rates? Or is the correct response to rising crime rates or crime rates within specific groups an adoption of being "tough on crime", thus increasing rates of incarceration and even deaths in custody for oppressed minorities and racial groups? This is an exploration of not adjusting the level of penalties and instead focusing on the core issues and inequalities behind crime-rates. It is clear that it is "damaged people" in general rather than specific racial groups that correlate with elevated crime rates, so why not use crime rates to identify who is facing inequality?