JSM628 European Policy and Practice towards Ethnic Minorities
21 st October 2015
Magdalena Wolfova literature: van den Berghe, P., 1996. Does race matter? In J. Hutchinson & A. D. Smith, eds. Ethnicity. Oxford readers. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 57–63.
H. Eriksen, T., 1996. Ethnicity, race, class and nation. In J. Hutchinson & A. D. Smith, eds. Ethnicity.
Oxford readers. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 28–31.
Central quotation: ‘’Racism is conceivably a case of culture ‘highjacking’ genes which were selected for different ends (e.g. skin pigmentation regulations exposure to sun radiation in different latitudes), and making them serve a totally different social agenda.’’ (van den Berghe 1996, p.62)
Argument: Genetic correlation with behaviour is misleadingly used for other purposes that are out of the logic of biological principles and its causes. It causes far-reaching social consequences that are harmful and unjustifiable.
Question: So that means the terms such as "race" and "ethnicity" should be used only in a discursive sense, it means used only where certain groups explicitly differ from each other and by contrast not to identify nor address cases where this has not been told yet in order to prevent a conflict and discrimination? I look at this issue from commentator’s point of view (sociologist, political scientist, public officials, and media in general) – he should not to delimit something that has not been defined yet, to avoid catching (unduly) the attention to diversity? Isn't it some "commentary" ethics concerning this issue?
Experiential connection: I can mention my experience with discrimination of Romanies in the Czech
Republic. This problem is connected with strong social isolation from majority. The isolation even deepens the social and cultural difference (there is also a question about the deracination of Romany culture and identity but this is not this topic). You can see that emerges strong neo-Nazi social agenda against Romanies which has far-reaching social consequences and public society reacts on this by founding organisations like Romea that helps to eliminate discrimination.
Textual connection: Eriksen says ‘’there has always been so much interbreeding between human populations that it would be meaningless to talk of fixed boundaries between races.’’ (H. Eriksen
1996, p.29) But van den Berghe speaks about frequent creation of boundaries between different groups. Are these arguments contradictory? While Eriksen separated clearly the definition of race from ethnicity, van den Berghe combines them. How Eriksen says van den Berghe “…would rather regard ‘race’ relations as a special case of ethnicity.” (H. Eriksen 1996, p.29) On the first look it seems they are on opposite sides but comes out one argument doesn’t exclude another.
Implications: It would be convenient to keep in mind van den Berghe’s theory about emerging racism, especially for executives, not to nourish discrimination and conflicts which would break into uncontrollable wave of hate and possible destabilization of society and system, whose inverse (i.e. stability) is one of the priorities of government.

JSM628 European Policy and Practice towards Ethnic Minorities
21 st October 2015
Sample Self assessment form
Magdalena Wolfova
, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University
Student’s name:
Magdalena Wolfova
Elina Hiipakka
AQCI ASSESSMENT FORM
Name of assessor:
Date: 21 st
2015
21.10
October
Essay title:
Comments
1) Is the chosen quotation central to the author’s argument?
Excellent Good Average Poor Not acceptable
+
2) Has the main argument been fully understood (including its ‘for’ and ‘against’ sides, if applicable)?
3a) Is the question raised important/relevant/interesting?
+
+
+
+
+
Maybe someone says that I should mention the nepotism issue but I think that this is the outcome of all thoughts of the author in the text. Nepotism was only a part of it.
Quotation describes the author’s thinking.
It’s short and accurate.
Maybe I could expand the
‘’other’’ purposes but the most important is the
‘’misleading use’’ and the overall nonsense of racism.
I think when you understand it, it is interesting:-D
3b) Has this question not been fully answered in the text?
4) Is the experiential connection relevant/interesting?
5a) Is the textual connection relevant/interesting?
+ +
+
+
I hope that the connection is clear in this short

JSM628 European Policy and Practice towards Ethnic Minorities
21 st October 2015
5b) Has it been cited properly? + +
Magdalena Wolfova paragraph.
Maybe it isn’t as relevant to the main argument as it should be.
You could add the references to the
Argument part also.
5c) Has it been adequately explained how the present text's argument contrasts with, contradicts, confirms, clarifies, or elaborates the other text's argument or point ?
6) Have the implications been well understood, can they have a practical impact for policy making?
7) Expression/Presentation a) Are the style, grammar and general use of English adequate? b) Is the AQCI professionally presented?
Essay grade: B
Further comments:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Maybe it’s more about
“politics” making but in this view it has great impact.