Discrimination of individuals and groups of people
Discrimination of individuals and groups of people by institutions and society at large has received extensive witness around the world. In most cases, this discrimination targets minority groups where they get subjected to unequal treatment, selection, or general bias in the access of amenities and public services. Even before the origination of the industrial revolution, the world has witnessed many instances of discrimination. The absence of minority groups from essential positions in most esteemed institutions is a clear indication that still discrimination roams in our society. In spite of the objective, whether done intentionally or unintentionally, discrimination retards the progress of our planet in all aspects. The question that remains unanswered is to what extent has this discrimination affected the world, and how can it be curbed?
Norwegian citizens, especially foreigners, have adversely tasted the effects of discrimination. According to Ugelvik and Damsa, in correction institutions, there is a structured way of correcting nationals and a more severe correctional system reserved for foreigners (Ugelvik & Damsa, 2017). The opening of the all-foreign prison in 2013 depicts a rise in this case. The prison goes on to separate foreigners concerning race and citizenship — Kongsvinger prison specially designed for foreigners who have received a final expulsion order from the immigration services. According to statistics, the proportion of foreign nationals in Norweigan prisons has rapidly increased from one out of every six prisoners to around one to every three prisoners (Ugelvik et al., 2017). Instinctively, this has deemed the foreigner imprisonment a menace. The discourse in the political scenes in Norway revolves around the foreign imprisonment menace, many terming it as a social problem(Ugelvik et al., 2017).
Journal of refugee studies under the article Humiliation Experienced by Somali Refugees in Norway describes the life of a refugee trying to cope up with living in a foreign country(Fangen, 2006). Due to the language barrier, insufficient cultural knowledge misunderstanding may occur, leading to humiliation. The population’s prejudice against strangers has also significantly contributed to this humiliation, according to Fangen. The Somalis felt humiliated by the way they get portrayed in the media and how officials meet them. They were described as proud, arrogant, difficult to understand, and hard to integrate into society. Unintended or systematic humiliation occurs when out of the unplanned scenario, embarrassment occurs. Fangen also states many instances where a misunderstanding occurs between the Somalis and the officials, leading to humiliation. On top of that, gossip and stigmatization resulting from the majority population contribute to shame.
Fangen states that although the feeling of humiliation may be person, the process itself is a relationship between the person and the emotionally relevant human environment, meaning that the concept of shame is interactional and relational.
People of trans Norwegian-Iranian marriages have found themselves in a dilemma. In Norway’s regulations of marriage mahr (the Muslim dower) is not approved because it contradicts with Norway’s gender equality principles. On the other side, in Iran, mahr in mandatory in every marriage. A marriage cannot get registered without mahr. It is a big challenge, therefore, to the Iranians who are in Norway who would like to be married to Norwegians. The diverging marriage contexts have raised concerns, especially concerning Iranians in the diaspora. All this termed as discrimination of human rights. Everyone is entitled to a right of marriage and given the liberty to conduct the marriage in their preferred way. Unfortunately, in Norway, this is not the case. According to the National Organization for Civil Registration, in 2009, every 7.1 marriages on a national basis ended in divorce, the most used explanation being the uncertainty future the Iranian young people in Norway(Bøe, 2018).
An overview of traditional institution discrimination displays a different dimension from the modern institution discrimination. In this case, it is merely segregation. The minority groups were blocked from the better-paying jobs and lived a life of mere peasantry. They enjoyed fewer occupational choices and fewer political rights. They had limited access to quality education, and their schools remained separate from those of the majority group. In short, they lived a marginalized life of separation, inequality, violence, and hopelessness. Segregation had stripped them of legal and civil rights.
The difference between the traditional and modern institutional discrimination is that in the traditional one, the cases involved were mostly intentional. The minority group was intentionally put in segregation, suppressed by biased laws that favor the majority group. The minority had limited power to change their situations because they never had access to the governing body, and even their interaction with the majority group was limited. In the modern world, although discrimination still roams, most of the cases occur unintentionally. Discrimination qualifies as a crime that is punishable by law, and minorities have some access to the government; hence they can voice their concerns.
The Committee of Racial Discrimination (CRD) in a report reiterates Norway’s commitment to fighting discrimination. Everyone deserves to be allowed to succeed regardless of the background. The National Human Rights Institution has started operating. The main work of this institution is to enforce human rights and ensure equitability in all social aspects. The Equality and Anti-Discrimination act of 2017 also propagates Norway forward towards a discrimination-free nation(“OHCHR | Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination examines report of Norway”, 2020). The government is also aiming at incorporating foreigners and refugees into the workforce. It will ensure equitability and revolutionization into a discrimination-free nation.
There is also a program to train the Norway language and social studies. In this way, there will be limited misunderstanding cases. Hate speech also raises concerns. A committee of experts after raising this issue realized that there is no editorial team to control media. They welcomed the Stop Hate Speech Campain. Everyone should d equal opportunity to access jobs and social amenities regardless of their gender, race, background, and social status. The government should create an avenue where the public can share their concerns and air their view. The Sami group, which has, for a long time, experienced discrimination, should be legally recognized, and given equal opportunities as the other groups. The political scene, which has been challenging, should provide more allocations to the minority group.
Through the above measures, Norway is making positive progress toward the elimination of all forms of discrimination. The government and its stakeholders should benchmark from other nations that have succeeded in national integration. These are countries that have taken back all differences and united in one spirit. A united kingdom will always stand. If all citizens can unitq1qe and contribute towards the public building with no discrimination, then Norway would have made a significant step towards the realization of its national goals.