Philosophy

Discrimination and racism

People are saying that, if the U.S. doesn't give harbor security over to an Arab country that survived normal scrutiny, that's racism, discrimination, all those things. I think not. If the White House doesn't give a janitorial job to a person who survived normal scrutiny, once they determine that he or she is of Arab descent, that's racism, that's discrimination. But a huge company with many ways of making money is not just a janitor only larger. It is a different sort of animal altogether.There's some legitimate discretion here that's not proper in the janitor's case.

It is like the issue of a public official indicted for a crime. It seems to me quite proper for that person's superiors to say: the shadow of suspicion over this person, while his or her case proceeds through the legal system, will compromise the person's ability to do this sort of job. He or she has to go. Again, if the person is a janitor, other rules apply.

For some public roles, confidence without shadows is a job requirement, just as good teeth are a job requirement for modeling. It isn't fair, but this isn't the sort of issue where fairness rules.

I don't know what to say, finally, about the harbor control matter. I would hate to have this case taken as an excuse to fire Arab janitors, and I fear that that is how it will be taken. I also think it likely that, in the event of a terrorist incident, for all sorts of reasons, those in charge of investigating that incident and managing its results will not be happy to have port security under foreign administration, especially under Arab administration. And the sources of that unhappiness will have very little to do with the competence of decency of the company involved. Issues about Arab administration may be red herrings, but, if so, they are red herrings that will confuse the bloodhounds after a serious disaster.