Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site kontron.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!pertec!kontron!cramer
From: cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.politics
Subject: Re: Discrimination and AA and Racism
Message-ID: <331@kontron.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 5-Jul-85 12:15:24 EDT
Article-I.D.: kontron.331
Posted: Fri Jul  5 12:15:24 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 6-Jul-85 11:11:14 EDT
References: <489@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> <292@looking.UUCP> <354@mhuxr.UUCP> <200@fear.UUCP> <363@mhuxr.UUCP>
Organization: Kontron Electronics, Irvine, CA
Lines: 40
Xref: utcs net.women:6310 net.politics:9592

> > The whole idea of having a law is to FORCE people who disagree with
> > you to do what you want.  The whole idea of AA legislation is to
> > force employers who want to hire in a governmentally-approved manner.
> > 
> Note that the law only FORCES employers to offer equal opportunity.
> AA plans are arrived at "voluntarily", with more or less governmental
> arm twisting. MOST often, the arm twisting occurs because the employer
> refuses to stop conscious and unconscious discriminatory practices.
> 
I'm sure glad you put that word "voluntarily" in quotes, because the
arm twisting (threats to cut off contracts) is not *quite* the same as
a truly voluntary situation.  In the case of colleges, though, the
government requires colleges to abide by EEO and AA rules, even if the
college has no control over receiving federal funds (e.g. students
receiving federal grants which go directly the student).  While I would
agree that usually the problem is an employer who is engaged in 
discriminatory practices, it is unfair to those employers who are not
discriminating, and just happen to have a low percentage of the
"right" groups.

> > The idea that these employers will "implement AA in a fair and
> > rational manner" is ludicrous.  The government is trying to force
> > them to do something they don't want to do, so they're trying to
> > wriggle out -- just as YOU would do if the government tried to force
> > YOU to do something you thought was wrong.
> > 
> You have just pointed out the necessity of AA. The law mandates equal
> opportunity. Discriminatory employers refuse to implement the law fairly.
> (Just saying "you can't discriminate" DOES NOT WORK, historically)
> So now what. Should Government, which theoretically also represents
> those discriminated agains, just say "too bad, we tried, but those evil
> employers just won't stop" ? Racist and sexist people will continue to be
> so. However, they should, they MUST not be allowed to impose their
> prejudices on others.
> 
> Marcel Simon

The history of drug prohibition in this country should be a warning to
everyone: if a significant portion of the population disapproves of a
law or policy, the only way to actually make it work is a police state.