Language probably plays a non-insignificant role. I'd hazard a guess that more Indians and Chinese (the nationalities that are fairly well-represented in US leadership positions) are learning English than German, Polish or Slovak.
Difficult to get the exact stats because it is illegal to measure demographic breakdowns in many European countries.
It really isn't illegal to measure, where did you come up with that?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/16/france-and-ger...
From where I read the article, it it says the contrary, Germany has racism and discrimination on the labor and housing market, but it can't be proven because it gathers no data.
So having no data actually makes the problem worse since racism and discrimination will continue to exist in practice (humans gonna be tribal) but you can't prove it because you have no data because you don't wanna be seen as racist.
It's a self fulfilling prophecy. You're just turning a blind eye on racism while touting yourself as a crusader against racism.
If anything, your claims are unsubstantiated.
Edit: here is a good source, see page 16 https://one.oecd.org/document/SDD/DOC(2018)9/en/pdf
My original wording was clumsy. Most EU countries do not collect race or ethnicity data. Those that do are all in Eastern europe and the UK, Ireland are the only Western exceptions.
in europe most of that should correlate with the questions we want to answer since there shouldn't be many immigrants that have been here for more than a few generations and speaking the local language fluently. those who have been here longer should be well integrated by now.
in the US that wouldn't work because discrimination happens despite people having been there for many generations all speaking fluent english.
Is there not discrimination against black people in Europe? Might be hard to tell considering that the designation isn't even recorded. The only other large minority racial group I can think of there is Arabs, but most of them migrated very recently.
there is. my point is that you can discover them by tracking their origin and language. no need to track their race. it's extremely rare that any have been living in europe for more than two, maybe three generations (maybe a bit less rare in france, belgium, netherlands due to their colonies).
EDIT: the guardian article actually touches on that and argues that migration background is being tracked, but doesn't work, but if i understand it correctly, they don't track previous generations.
but anyways, my suggestion is just a hack on the current law. what we really need to focus on is identifying factors that lead to discrimination and statistically track them. skin color is such a factor. if the law prevents that, then and we can't find another way to solve the problem, then maybe it should be changed.
> I lived in 2 EU countries and government had ethnical data on citizens.
Could you provide that data for France? I never said it was true of all EU countries.
e: Actually, reading your comment I am left a little confused - aren’t your latter paragraphs the exact point I am making?
Never understood the fixation in US of breaking every stat by ethnicity or skin color.
Without taking these stats, the Jim Crow South suddenly looks like an even-handed application of voting tests.
e: I will say, the number of comments I get from European commentators favoring the “putting your hands in front of your eyes” approach when it comes to racism in Europe does make it completely unsurprising how non-diverse their C-suite is as well as why they have difficulty attracting high-skilled immigrant talent.
Out of the richest 1000 Americans how many are blacks? 1? 2?
And what's the % like in prisons?
Wasn't Oprah the only black billionaire in US like for a decade?
US attracts talents because there's much more money in US than elsewhere and the political and bureaucratic environment favors entrepreneurship.
Please quit lecturing people around the world bantering a moral ground you don't have.
I agree. The attitude towards immigrants doesn't seem to affect how well they do anyway. The opportunities matter much more than anything else.
My dad grew up in a European country with colonies in Africa, with state sponsored racism against africans, but yeah it’s all reverse now.
Like it took until 2023 to finally outlaw intentional racial discrimination in American universities; that was A-OK and widely practiced before. And some of Google's internship programs publicly list what races they prefer, which is common in tech.
Anyway comparing it to a country that's been built on immigrants killing and banishing natives is plain lunacy.
Maybe so, but even Sony and Nissan had non-Japanese speaking CEOs for a while and Japan is not really know for its openness and progressiveness to foreigners.
Also, we're talking about global tech companies which reap profits from the global economy, so fluency of the local language that's only spoken by 5% of the world's population shouldn't matter that much, when those mega-corps hire teams of cultural and language experts for each market anyway.
I'd say it's more culture, mentality and protectionism of the status quo, than the language itself.
I think the Nissan case is a bit of an exception and if anything demonstrates how reluctant the Japanese are to have major Japanese multinationals run by someone not Japanese.