Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cybvax0.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!bellcore!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh
From: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: (Re:**N) Affirmative Action
Message-ID: <605@cybvax0.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 8-Jul-85 14:11:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: cybvax0.605
Posted: Mon Jul  8 14:11:13 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 11-Jul-85 07:24:31 EDT
References: <259@kontron.UUCP> <1340265@acf4.UUCP>
Reply-To: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Organization: Cybermation, Inc., Cambridge, MA
Lines: 59
Summary: 

In article <1340265@acf4.UUCP> mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) writes:
> >/* mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) /  3:23 pm  Jul  5, 1985 */
> 
> >I grow very tired of these ignorant, ivory-tower economic predictions.
> 
> Seriously, when you call someone ignorant, it would be best if you
> demonstrated that this is true.  Calling a prediction "ivory-tower"
> says nothing about its merits and, therefore, does not seem to be of
> any use here.

Simple demonstration of both "ignorance" and "ivory tower" in libertarianism:
no such social order has ever existed.  Thus, libertarian "predictions"
are guesses whose quality is probably less in touch with reality than the
inaccurate predictions of social scientists, economists, etc. trying to
understand the society right under their noses.
 
> >If you are so certain that there is a financial benefit to not discriminating
> >go into a bigoted white neighborhood, build housing, announce (by word or
> >deed) that you're a "nigger lover" (they'll call you that), and that you
> >intend to outcompete them because of this pragmatism.
> 
> >You will very quickly see many of the mechanisms by which discrimination is
> >reinforced despite market pressures.  The fact is that there are many forms
> >of coercion besides market pressures, and postulating a libertarian society
> >without coercion is as realistic as wishing away crime in our own society.
> >Vandalism, arson, assault, and a variety of other hate (think Ku Klux Klan)
> >are coercive realities that must be dealt with.
> 
> Market pressures are not coercion.

Libertarians may construct a legal definition of coercion which exempts
market pressures, yet market pressures are coercive and can force decisions
against the will.
 
> Such acts as you describe are already against the law.  What we need is
> tougher enforcement.

Then what makes you think libertarianism would provide tougher enforcement?
Who will pay for it?  Certainly not the well-to-do white majorities.
They'll be happy to pay to continue the repression though.

It would be possible to hire greater security: but *poof* there goes your
financial advantage.

> >30 years of stronger government
> >coercion has produced sudden and dramatic lifting of barriers, as a variety
> >of history and occupational statistics show.
> 
> During the past 30 years great gains (and a few losses) in civil rights
> have been made.  During that period, government has taken an active role
> in promoting such rights (and, to a lesser extent, in attacking them).
> From these facts alone, one cannot draw the conclusion that you have.

Golly, if I can't draw a conclusion in the face of the "coincidence" of
programs and their intended results, then why should we try your untested
libertarian solutions?
-- 

Mike Huybensz		...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh