Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!yale!husc6!seismo!lll-crg!lll-lcc!qantel!ihnp4!houxm!whuxl!whuts!orb From: orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER) Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc Subject: Re: Affirm.Action (to sevener) Message-ID: <989@whuts.UUCP> Date: Fri, 19-Sep-86 08:41:58 EDT Article-I.D.: whuts.989 Posted: Fri Sep 19 08:41:58 1986 Date-Received: Tue, 23-Sep-86 01:32:53 EDT References: <1099@drutx.UUCP> <1506@ihuxn.UUCP> <770@mtung.UUCP> <2664@burdvax.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 66 > > So Tim, how come affirmative action and quotas weren't necessary in > order to integrate pro baseball? How come you liberals always want > government to step in at the drop of a hat? If pro baseball could > rectify its problems without government interference, how come > liberals require something else be done in other situations? > > -- > Tom Albrecht If all organizations *did* integrate voluntarily then of course there would be no need for affirmative action. But they haven't and they didn't integrate even after baseball did. Many of the best musicians in the world were black 30 years ago. They played before white audiences at expensive clubs. And yet..... People like Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington, Cab Calloway could *play* at white-owned nightclubs, but couldn't *eat* there or come there except to entertain. They could not stay in white hotels, they could not even use white *bathrooms* in many places. This awful discrimination was ended by a *combination* of efforts: economic boycotts, sittins, demonstrations and finally, yes, the support of the federal government. This same absurdly and cruelly unjust situation regarding segregated facilities, even for blacks acknowledged as the top talents in their field, has been even more insidious for employment and jobs. Again, you seem to have your head in the sand or simply wish to ignore the *facts* about those cases that have involved affirmative action. We are not talking about organizations which have 8% blacks when they are actually 10% of the population, we are talking about organizations which have 0% blacks or 1 black in a thousand as a token. We are not talking about organizations which haven't hired blacks in the past 6 months we are talking about organizations which haven't hired blacks in *decades*. I don't believe that most of the Propertarians on the net are racists but I do think you fail to see things as they unfortunately are. Racism exists. It was an underlying factor behind Reagan's re-election (remember that Reagan was endorsed in both 1980 and 1984 by the Ku Klux Klan) and it is pernicious and enduring despite major strides we have made over the past 30 years. This was graphically pointed out by recent events in the Agriculture Dept. A black employee for the Soil and Water Conservation Service filed suit for individual discrimination against the Agriculture Dept. He won. Even before he won he received anonymous phone calls threatening him, warning him to stop his suit and so forth. After winning his suit and being promoted to a supervisory position he just had his house burned down. Should we take away this individual's right to sue? Should we allow racism to exist forever? Here is a case, *not* of an affirmative action class-action lawsuit but of an *individual* lawsuit of the sort which seems to be favored by Propertarians. And the person gets their house burned down. So just what do you propose *doing* about racism? If voluntary actions are proposed let me ask you this: just when is the last time *you* did any voluntary action to stop racism and discrimination? I expect the usual Propertarian excuse: "but we are *not* obligated to do anything! If somebody is bleeding on the street, we have the *right* to let them die! If some child is starving, we have the *right* to let them starve! If somebody cannot get a job or promotion and their hous is burned down for trying to do something as an individual about this injustice, we have the *right* to do *nothing*!" tim sevener whuxn!orb