Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>>   If the current situation is that some minorities are being discriminated
>>> against, the solution is not to give them *more* protection than to the
>>> rest.
> 
>> Are you saying that the current levels of protection are adequate?
> 
>   Why would I be ranting if I thought so? Some groups of people *are* being
> protected more than others, and that's discrimination.

You have missed the irony in my comment.

>>> Two wrongs don't make a right. You don't fight discrimination with
>>> more discrimination. The correct solution is to give them the *same*
>>> protection as everybody else. That, by definition, removes the discrimination.
> 
>> Yep. And this is exactly the sort of thing affirmative action is supposed to 
>> address.
> 
>   "Affirmative action" is just a buzzword meaning "discrimination".
> Trying to counter-act discrimination (real or perceived) with even more
> discrimination. That's not the way to go.

That's what it is. But it's more trying to counter-act the effects of 
earlier discrimination by discriminating in the other direction. It is an 
open argument as to whether this is good or bad.

>   If a law does not apply equally to all people, then it's discriminatory.
> "Apply" here meaning "has the same effect on", rather than "is being
> equally imposed on".

Sure. Except here's the rub. Affirmative action is an attempt to "have the 
same effect on" instead of being "is being equally imposed on."

Take for example forced "desegregation".  For a number of decades, it was 
illegal in the USA for black students to attend the same schools as white 
students. Black people, who were undereducated and thus poor because they 
used to be slaves, were forced to attend the schools that the black 
population could afford to pay for, which were thus of lower quality than 
the white schools.

Then a law is passed saying "black kids get to go to the same schools as 
white kids." OK, all fixed now, right?

No, of course not.  The black kids still can't afford to go to the wealthy 
schools, and racist white town members will reduce the amount of money going 
to schools where the black kids are trying to go and spend it on the white 
kids. Teachers will not pay any attention to the few black kids wealthy 
enough to come to their classes, and flunk them out at every opportunity so 
they don't have to have black kids mixing with the white kids.

But hey, we eliminated the discrimination, right?

>> That's what you get in a democracy, sometimes even in a constitutional 
>> democracy.
> 
>   Fortunately in a democracy the citizens have a way of correcting the
> wrongs.

More often than not, around here, the democracy causes the wrongs rather 
than correcting them. That's my point.

>   I have nowhere said that. All I said was "democracy is a good thing
> because it allows you to try to correct the wrongs you are seeing in your
> society" (as opposed to some other more totalitarian forms of government).

I'm saying that this sort of wrong is caused by unconstrained democracy. 
Problems of inappropriate discrimination are caused, pretty much by 
definition, when a large number of people decide that some small number of 
people shouldn't be judged on their individual merit. It happens when 
there's a majority that's inappropriately asserting their opinions over a 
minority. I think the more democratic your society, the more likely that a 
minority of 10% of the population is going to get shit upon.

Hell, in California, gays used to have the right to get married in the 
constitution, and it was the democracy here that removed that right from the 
constitution.

Indeed, I can't really think of any time when an actual law was passed 
through the democratic process in the USA that significantly reduced the 
effects of prejudice, except maybe women's suffrage. Getting rid of slavery 
took a civil war. Getting rid of other kinds of prejudice is generally done 
by the courts interpreting the constitution, which was created in far from a 
democratic process.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message