Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!gargoyle!carnes
From: carnes@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP (Richard Carnes)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: The net's favorite form of argument -- reply to Sykora
Message-ID: <456@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 13-May-85 14:21:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: gargoyle.456
Posted: Mon May 13 14:21:02 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 15-May-85 00:27:03 EDT
Organization: U. Chicago - Computer Science
Lines: 20

In article <> mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) writes:
>
>How do you define "racism" and "taxation?"

"Racism" in social-scientific contexts means something like the
belief that one's own ethnic group is innately superior
(intellectually or morally) to some other ethnic group.  "Theft"
usually means an unlawful transfer of wealth.  Taxation, of course,
is governmental collection of revenues.  

To repeat the main point of my article:  Showing that affirmative
action is or is not racism, or that taxation is or is not theft
according to this or that definition, does not by itself prove
anything about the justice or injustice of these practices.  "Aff.
action is racism," "taxation is theft," "profit is theft," "abortion
is murder," etc. make good slogans but bad arguments, and those who
use them as arguments only demonstrate that they can't tell the
difference.  

Richard Carnes