Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!hellgate.utah.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!ora!daemon
From: travis@douglass.cs.columbia.edu (Travis Lee Winfrey)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: AA, continued
Message-ID: <6625@columbia.edu>
Date: 10 Nov 89 23:14:52 GMT
References: <7152@cs.utexas.edu> <2790@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> <16042@duke.cs.duke.edu>
Sender: ambar@ora.ora.com
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 38
Approved: ambar@ora.com

In article <16042@duke.cs.duke.edu> gazit@cs.duke.edu (Hillel) writes:
>In article <2790@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> (Damballah Wedo) writes:

>>Given representation at the inputs, we can expect, if the process
>>is free of discrimination (as ensured by EEO), that there will be
>>representation at the outputs.

>So why do you insist that in *every* AA program the race/sex of the
>applicants will be mentioned?  Why *no* AA program can find
>these perfect standards and stop asking about race/sex?

Hillel, do you claim that there is discrimination based on
race/gender, that this discrimination is wrong, but that any solution
seeking to redress these wrongs should not ask about race or gender?

>>Yes, there are stupid implementations of AA that hire or promote
>>affected class members regardless of their qualifications. The principle
>>of AA cannot he held responsible for such stupidity, any more that
>>capitalism can be held responsible for Ivan Boesky, 

>Ivan Boesky is a small failure of capitalism.  If every broker had been
>someone like Boesky than it was a *big* failure of capitalism (that was
>more or less the situation before the Depression).

Although this thread seems to veer off into the wings, I do want to
correct your mistaken impression that the 1929 Depression was caused
by insider trading, or that insider trading is a failure of Capitalism
per se.  Insider trading is illegal in the US, but that is based on an
idea of fairness.  It is no less a `failure' of Capitalism than are
monopolies or the Mafia.  You seem to have confused pure Capitalism
with what is or is not currently legal in the United States.

It is interesting that this confusion of yours corresponds directly to
your disdainful view of affirmative action implementations.

t

Arpa:	travis@cs.columbia.edu	Usenet: rutgers!columbia!travis