Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site spar.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!decwrl!spar!ellis From: ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: Discrimination and Affirmative Action Message-ID: <365@spar.UUCP> Date: Wed, 26-Jun-85 10:09:59 EDT Article-I.D.: spar.365 Posted: Wed Jun 26 10:09:59 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 27-Jun-85 08:13:37 EDT References:<338@unc.UUCP> <337@mhuxr.UUCP> <219@kontron.UUCP> <357@mhuxr.UUCP> <211@fear.UUCP> Reply-To: ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) Organization: Schlumberger Palo Alto Research, CA Lines: 80 Summary: >[Robert Plamondon] >>[Marcel] > >> I have difficulty with believing that racism and sexism will "get >> better" without vigorous action, with government leading the way. We >> have heard that repeatedly throughout the century ('don't make waves, >> things will get better" sometime, always just after my life >> expectancy) > >But things ARE better, aren't they? I've seen figures that indicate that the ratio of black:white income levels DROPPED 10% from the one-time high of 65% at the end of LBJ's term to ~55%. >And wasn't the government the >major *BARRIER* to progress in many instances (No votes for women, >"protective" labor laws for women)? And that was before women could vote. Back when blacks were kept away from the polls. For better or worse, since FDR, big government has been the agent of social reform. I don't like big government, but since even nonblatant, de facto job discrimination is profitable, who else can force change? `The system' is us. And our only vehicle for conscious control is the government. Your faith in the status quo is understandable though, as it appears to favor you. Incidentally, Robert, there are far better arguments for your position than those you consistently use... >Most of the progress in this >century has been in the area of REPEALING discriminatory laws that >were passed by the very government you trust so well. Frankly, I don't give a damn whether laws are repealed or passed, provided that social welfare is served. Perhaps you are in favor of minimizing government interference -- if so, please keep that argument in net.politics. I don't particularly trust the government either, but at least it is accountable to the public; besides, can you name one agent that has acted for the benefit of our underprivileged to the extent that our government has since ~1945? White males NATURALLY have every reason to trust the existing order -- its already biased in their favor -- as any head count of business execs or salary levels will easily demonstrate. >An example of things getting better by themselves is alcohol >consumption in America, which (on a per capita basis) has dropped to >less than half of its level in the 1840s. Did Prohibition play a >major role in this, do you think? The facts indicate otherwise. If the purpose of AA were to `correct bad attitudes among the racists' then I might accept your analogy -- I agree that legal action is pointless against victimless crimes. The problem here is one of group vs group, not of individual vs self, and that problem seems to remain in spite of america's major improvements in societal attitudes towards blacks/women since 1960. The worst enemy is the existing predominance of conformist (though not always overtly racist/sexist) white males with prestige jobs. Note that nonconformist white males have great difficulty succeeding beyond certain levels, too. Prestige work and management environments poorly reflect the pluralism of our population. Skin color and sex, like language, mannerisms, dress and customs, are but two of the criteria our conformist society uses to statistically and unfairly judge people's worthiness for advancement. Must every kind of person in our society sell out to the flimsy anglo male middle class image before we can have economic equality? -michael