From: asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Freedom of Association
Date: 15 Aug 92 01:31:24 GMT
            <1992Aug4.011919.280@informix.com>
            <w2vmxsb.phil@netcom.com>
            <1992Aug5.170933.15327@bellahs.com>
            <SLAGLE.92Aug6013823@sgi417.msd.lmsc.lockheed.com>
            <192869@ipl.jpl.nasa.
Reply-To: asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Organization: Foundation for the Increased Wealth of Chipmunks

Written in article <193133@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov>
 by pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew):

: In article <19428@fritz.filenet.com>, asylvain@felix.filenet.com 
:    (The Chipmunk) writes:
:
:> What you mean to ask, "what if the entire planet is made up of greedy, 
:> ignorant, stupid slobs, who'd sooner cut their own throats before giving 
:> me any sort of break?"
:> Simple answer?  You die.
:
: All right, you caught me.  I knew that my scenario wasn't reasonable; I was
: just fishing to see what I'd catch.

And me, like a dope, walked right into your trap!  OUCH!  Perhaps I can
chew my leg off?

:> However, the mutual dependency of the individual members of society does 
:> not imply that society must have control over the individual members.
:
: Let me give you a real-life scenario that is the reason I have trouble
: accepting the absolute right to freedom of association.

: [real-life scenario where every insurance company and every bank in]
: [every town across most of the country is run by white males.]

: One of the things that has been mentioned in the past by those who support
: freedom of association is that if a business discriminates against you, you
: always have the option to start your own.  But just about every business I
: can think of requires a rather large infusion of capital to begin.  If the
: banks won't give you that capital, what are your options?

Capital comes from a large variety of sources, including friends and
relatives.  I'm sure you've heard that Johnson Products, maker of black
haircare products, started on a small bank loan that Mr. Johnson told
the bank was for a vacation.

But look at the situation from a different angle.  Assume for the moment
that one of the reasons that discrimination exists is BECAUSE of certain
govt rules (which is true).  Assume then that if these rules are elimin-
ated (and some have been) that a more "natural" order of things will
eventually occur, including a lot less discrimination.

How many more businesses would open if it wasn't for the myriad of
regulations from all levels of govt that constrain them?  A friend of
mine wanted to start a hamburger-on-wheels company, where he'd roll
around the neighborhood with a portable grill.  He found the regs to
follow to be overpowering.  Without those, all he would have needed 
would have been to buy a used grill.  Very cheap, and he'd already
bought it.  It may not have made him into a Rockafeller, but it would 
have been a start.  A start which was denied him in the interests of 
"public protection."

Can change happen overnite?  Of course not.  How long will it take?  
Well, we still have some rules to work on, so it's even hard to say 
that we've even really started.  Lotsa of lip-service, but that goes
with the game whenever you enter the political arena.  But real change?
No, I don't think so.

If it's next to impossible for a black to even start a small hamburger 
stand, how do you expect blacks to eventually start their own banks?  
How can minorities grow financially if you use govt rules to prevent 
them from even getting that small start?  How can you learn to run if
crawling is against the law?

: Another problem with the "good old boy" network is that I see no end to it
: without outside intervention.  It is a self-perpetuating cycle that has no
: internal incentive to change.  And the people with the will to change it
: generally don't have the economic power to force such a change.

There's already evidence that the so-called "glass ceiling" is being 
circumvented by people starting their own businesses.  Yes, it is often 
more difficult from outside the "good old boy (GOB)" network, but it's 
not impossible.  Not every black or woman finds it difficult to raise 
funding.

: The other problem with the discrimination I witnessed is the cost to society:
: specifically, the cost in wasted talents and lives, plus the cost of the
: buildup of anger, resentment, and frustration, on the part of people who
: are denied equal opportunity.  I am one of the ones who pays this cost.

There's no argument there.

GOB network also has other costs you haven't mentioned.  Frequently, 
someone gets a loan or a job or what-have-you because they're part of 
the network, but that's their only qualification.  So they fail, and 
drag down some of their "old boys" with 'em.

: Should I have a right to ask the government to correct this situation?

There's the $64 question.

How do you determine when a situation is due to malice, ignorance, or
circumstances beyond anyone's control?  There are literally 1000's of
things which have some "cost" to society, including you, directly or
indirectly.  Is the govt to intervene in all of them?

If the answer is "yes," why should we even bother continuing the farce
that this is a govt "by the people?"  Just call it "big brother" and be
done with it.

There's a related question ... does the govt even have the ability to 
correct the situation?

If a company wishes to remain bigoted, how can a govt stop them?

For example, suppose a company decides arbitrarily that every black
applicant is "anti-social" because they seem uncomfortable in an
all-white company?  Suppose the govt arbitrarily decides that such a
company is to be penalized?  What's to keep them from arbritrarily
making this decision for lack of blacks, lack of Asians, lack of
whomever, but there don't happen to be any such folks living within 
100 miles?  Once you give the govt a power, you invite abuse of that
power.

: As it stands now, I have problems with both of the extremes.  I have diffi-
: culty accepting an absolute right to freedom of association, just as I have
: difficulty accept an absolute right to equal opportunity.  The trouble is
: that I can't come up with a middle ground that satisfies me.  Certainly, the
: solutions proposed so far (e.g., Affirmative Action) have been good in intent,
: but less than satisfactory in results (in more ways than one).

: what then do you see as a solution in this case?

I think the major stumbling block is in the implicit assumption that it
is necessary to invite the govt as a Solver of Problems.

Once you get past that, and even learn to recognize areas where the govt
is Creator of Problems, you might find it easier to come up with that
"middle ground."

Ie, the Ultimate Solution may not lie anywhere on the plane between 
Ultimate Control and Ultimate Freedom, but somewhere off-plane.  The
situation is not one or two-dimensional.

: Paul Bartholomew

-- 
The Chipmunk.
Opinions are mine, void where prohibited, taxed, licensed or regulated.
Absurdity: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own
opinion.
Xref: sparky ca.politics:6893 talk.politics.misc:40301 ba.politics:4611