display

The situation on the Corona front does not seem as serious as it is always portrayed.

Otherwise the city of Berlin would hardly come up with the idea of ​​being the first federal state to introduce “a quota for civil servants with a migration background”.

The “migrant quota” should be 35 percent and “apply to the state administration and to all state companies such as Stadtreinigung BSR or local transport BVG, but also to foundations, public prosecutors and courts”.

At first, it sounds like someone who wants to become a judge or public prosecutor doesn't have to be a lawyer; it would be enough for him to be able to prove his migration background.

But it's not quite like that.

Migrants should "be given preference if they have the same qualifications and are underrepresented in an administration".

In Berlin in particular it would be difficult to find someone whose ancestors did not come from Gdansk, Breslau, Brno, Katowice or Transylvania, not to mention the descendants of the Huguenots who fled to Berlin at the end of the 17th century.

Around 1700, every fourth Berliner was an immigrant French.

display

First of all, the term “migration background” would have to be defined in a binding manner.

How far back does it go?

What is its half-life?

When does it expire?

Does someone who wants to be recognized as a MmM (person with a migration background) have to be descended from migrants on both the maternal and paternal side, or is one page of the pedigree sufficient?

Henryk M. Broder in conversation with Hamed Abdel-Samad

Source: WORLD

I am sure that the Berlin administration, namely Berlin's Senator for Social Affairs Elke Breitenbach (Die Linke), will manage to find fair and practicable answers to all of these questions, especially since no MmM has to have had a specific experience of discrimination.

It is about a “structural discrimination” based on the fact that it is “inherent to the system”, that is, actually irreparable.

Still, I feel a certain discomfort.

The whole thing seems to me as if the passengers of a ship that has a heavy list and threatens to sink are talking about who can sit at the captain's table at dinner.

Those who have been on board for a long time or those who have only recently come on board.

That too would be a case of structural discrimination that needs to be resolved before the steamer goes down.