The people who wrote the Chinese Exclusion Act didn't get to know any Chinese people. They were judging the entirety of an entire ethnic group without meeting them.
Prejudice and racism are closely related, but they're not 100% the same thing. They often manifest identically, so it doesn't make a whole lot of difference. Racism is a dislike of a certain "race" (as defined by the person doing the disliking), and usually carries with it the idea that the racist is in the powerful majority ethnic group and the disliked party is a smaller group. Prejudice can be about anything. (It's usually race, though.)
Questions About Prejudice
- Could the Chinese Exclusion Act exist in a later era when people of Chinese descent were more common? Can familiarity with the variety present in every ethnic group mean these kinds of laws would be impossible?
- What exactly was the Chinese Exclusion Act pre-judging about the Chinese laborers? Their race? Religion? Economic impact? All of these things? Are any of them okay to pre-judge? Which, and why?
- Prejudice in law enforcement has been a contentious conversation topic in recent years. People who dress a certain way or are of a certain race may be thought to be affiliated with organized crime, and so on. Why is, or why isn't, prejudice in this vein unacceptable? How might perception of police further impact social equity?
- Meeting every member of an ethnic group, religion, or political affiliation is impossible. Does this mean a certain amount of prejudice is inevitable? Why or why not? Do we harbor implicit biases against certain groups different than our own? If so, are we able to train ourselves out of these biases?
Chew on This
The Chinese Exclusion Act used prejudice against the Chinese as a convenient lever to enact necessary legislation to protect jobs.
Prejudice of this kind can only find a home in ignorance, and diversity is the best way to combat such ignorance.