Technically not wrong but only really true on a flat playing field, which is not the case in the real world. Racial minorities are usually not in a position where they have the power to oppress the majorities.
No, it's true no matter what. When did equality stop being the goal? If the playing field isn't level the solution is to try to level the playing field, not distort it in other areas and hope it all evens out.
Racial minorities are usually not in a position where they have the power to oppress the majorities.
No racial group should be oppressing or taking priority over anyone else. Why create more of it, thinking it will somehow nullify other areas? All any reasonable person wants is to be treated fairly, not take priority in a hospital and being beaten down in other areas of life.
When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Frank Herbert
> If the playing field isn't level the solution is to try to level the playing field, not distort it in other areas and hope it all evens out.
Unequal outcomes themselves count as proof of an uneven playing field these days, regardless if e.g. personal health choices such as obesity contribute. Except when a minority is better off, such as Asians in the US. Then things like a culture of hard work are permitted explanations.
I think the problem they're trying to address is that "levelling the playing field" to achieve equitable health outcomes for Maori and Pacific Islanders is a "wicked problem" in the sense that there are many fundamental socioeconomic issues to untangle that can and probably will take generations to address.
By tipping a thumb on the scales at later stages of the "health outcome pipeline" they hope to pull the levers they actually have access to, to improve outcomes for those groups now instead of in 20 years.
I'm not advocating for what they're doing but I can see the logic.
