From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,soc.motss,talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism
Subject: Re: On Banning Private Discrimination
Date: 28 Jul 92 22:37:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: hpcvaac.1992Jul28.223701.2232
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA

elliott@a8.ima.umn.edu (Frank Elliott) writes:
: In article <1992Jul28.182432.12289@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
: >
: >Not without laws that require such discrimination.  In the south, there were
: >many businesses that would have ignored the "Jim Crow" laws, if they had been
: >allowed to by the law and the racists. It was because of the local governments
: >that they were not able to do so.
: >
: 
:  This is the most self-serving piece of disinformation I've read in a while.
:  Discrimination is possible without laws to impose it.  Remember anything
:  from your highschool civics class?  It's called _de facto_ discrimination,
:  as opposed to _de jure_ discrimination.  Many black men were thrown in
:  jail under false rape charges and were later lynched without a trial.

It is "self-serving" in what way? Certainly - discrimination is possible
with or without laws to prohibit/impose it. I expect it is going to occur
in any society, regardless of the laws.

What does that have to do with what I wrote? There are going to be bastards
out there that discriminate against one group or another, no matter what you
do in your attempts to stop them. However, there are many that will not do
so, if left alone to make up their own minds.

:  An law unrelated to race was applied to have them arrested,
:  and a law against murder was not applied to those who lynched them.

The law just made it easier - they would have been beat or lynched, regardless.

:  Even minor charges such as loitering or vagrancy were used as an excuse
:  for imprisonment.

Isn't that what I said? The laws and the racists caused this to happen. Just
because the law was there did not cause the discrimination - it just made it
easier for the racists to do their will.

:  I grew up in the South in the 1960's, I know the history of race relations
:  there. I'm also aware of the fact that most blacks didn't leave the South
:  and head for the more prosperous North because they were faced with
:  discrimination in employment and housing.

What does this have to do with the argument? 

:  Laws to protect the civil rights of blacks were and are needed, and
:  as a white southerner I am _most_ grateful people like the Freedom Riders
:  who risked their lives to get such laws passed.  They made the world that
:  I grew up in a somewhat better place, though there is obviously a great
:  deal to be done.

Laws to protect the rights of all people are needed, not just the minorities.
As it is going now, we are all losing our freedom. I hope the sleeping 
public wakes up, before it is too late.

: > [Clap trap about a Libertarian Utopia deleted.]

Where did I ever mention a libertarian utopia? I am well aware that some
government will be essential. Someone has to protect the rights of the
individual - that is something that some groups in a libertarian society
might not want to do themselves.

Bill
Newsgroups: alt.activism,soc.motss,talk.politics.misc,alt.individualism