From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: On Banning Private Discrimination
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 01:01:00 GMT

dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
: In article <1992Jul22.203709.27148@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
: >dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
: >: 
: >: Actually, what I seem to notice is that almost every libertarian I know
: >: is a white heterosexual middle-to-upper class male.  Why is this, you may
: >: ask?  Because these people have never seen how terrible people can be
: >: to each other.  Since they have never experienced bias, they do not see it
: >: anywhere.
: >
: >You haven't met too many libertarians then.
: 
: No, I have.  There is one who is female, the rest are heterosexual white
: males.  I know a lot of them.

Now, you are waffling. Why did you drop out "middle-to-upper class"? I know
a fair number of libertarians (not necessarily Libertarians). Many of them
are students. A fair number are just scraping by. I know few who are making
a very comfortable living. 

Now, maybe my sample is non-rerepresentative - maybe yours is also. I am
aware that mine may be - do you?

: >How are you
: >so informed about what others have experienced in the way of mistreatment
: >or bias?
: 
: I know many gay men who have been fired for being gay (I was one, my lover
: was nearly another).  I know people who have been denied promotion for being
: female, I know people who have been denied promotion for being black.
: 
: I can cite cases of almost every minority being biased against for who they
: are, not what they do.

Certainly. I can say the same for just about any group you can mention. 

: > Why do you think that middle/upper class (whatever those are)
: >people are so braindead that they cannot read or experience or think for
: >themselves?
: 
: Because I have communicated with many of them.

And, of course, this automatically makes you capable of determining the
characteristics of everyone else in the world.

: >: I find it hard to believe that an american business would pay women as much
: >: as men if they were not afraid of a lawsuit (even with the fear of a lawsuit,
: >: they pay them less).
: >
: >This is a cultural thing - it is changing. More and more businesses are 
: >starting to pay, based on merit and performance, not on the persons sex
: >or race or longevity with the company. There is a long way to go, but the
: >process is happening, and it is not due to government mandate - no matter
: >how much you would like to believe that it is. It is due to the changing
: >perceptions of how people relate in the job market.
: 
: Do you believe that women would not be sexually harassed in the military
: if the government did not say "stop it"?

Do you think they would be harassed if they could sue for this harassment,
and the guilty parties punished? Do you think they would be harassed if
they could quit any time they chose to do so?

: >:                       I do not believe that all store-owners in the south
: >: would sell to afro-americans if they had any way to avoid it.  
: >
: >And, why should they have to? Why should I be required to sell my goods,
: >which I own until you pay me for them, to you if I do not wish to do so?
: >There are others that will sell to you, if I do not - maybe I do not like
: >"white monkeys" in my store. Now, if no one will sell to you, then you
: >have a reason for complaint.
: 
: I am a minority.  There are not enough gay owned businesses in the united
: states that I can take my business to them.  I have been thrown out of bars
: in Detroit where the owner has said "we don't serve faggots here."  Not
: worth pressing charges, but you bet your ass that if people thought they
: could get away with it, they would.

However, there are bars that you can go to - right? If not, then you and
your friends could open another bar - where you would not have a problem.
There are many businesses that do not discriminate against gays. I expect
there will be many more in the future. There are no laws, that I know of,
which prohibit such discrimination - so it appears that it is the attitude
of people which is changing toward more tolerance. One sign of this is
the attempts by various groups to get anti-homosexual ordinances passed
in various cities and states. In the past, such discrimination was taken
for granted to be acceptable and expected. I think the homo-phobes are
becoming worried that this is no longer true.

: >: The amount of hate that I see for being a gay man, in my day to day life,
: >: convinces me that given a choice, many many people would be biased against
: >: me.
: >
: >Certainly. They have a right to be - whether this hatred is reasonable or not.
: >I think they are stupid to feel this way, but that is their choice. As long
: >as they do not threaten to harm you, then they are free to be as unreasonable
: >as they wish. You and I may not like it - but that is beside the point. What
: >gives either of us the right to tell others what they may or may not believe?
: 
: Nothing.  As I said, your philosophy is wonderful from a theoretical point
: of view.  However, the reality of the situation is people will be as hateful
: as they can get away with.  Therefore, the people who are in the majority, and
: in power, are the ones who will control all the resources.

They can be as hateful as they wish. As long as they do not attack you. No
law in the country is going to make this hate go away. If the minorities
you were talking about were powerless, I would agree with you. However, this
is not the case. The way our government is right now, the majority is free
to repress any minority that they wish - such is how a representative
republic works. Right now, they could make it illegal for gays to open
a business in their town. It might, or might not, stand up to the inevitable
court challenges. But, until overturned, the gay minority would be repressed.
In a libertarian society, they would not have the right to pass such laws in
the first place.

: >By the same token, you should have the right to be gay, and be as public
: >about it as you wish, without threat of injury. As long as you do not attempt
: >to force your sexual preferences on anyone else, then you should have the
: >right to be free to practice them in any way that you wish.
: 
: There is a difference between a personal relation and a business relation.

There is? Neither is going to be good unless both parties agree to the terms
of the relationship. If a person does not wish to engage in either the business
or personal relationship, then they should have the right to refuse.

: However, libertarians have a hard time seeing this.

Please explain it to us. A bald statement means little or nothing. Give some
examples.

: >: In an ideal world, libertarianism might work (just like communism might
: >: work).  However, given the current situation with haves and have-nots, 
: >: libertarianism would give white heterosexual males the freedom to return
: >: to the exploitive days of the past.
: >
: >Possibly. It definitely could not be put in all at once. That doesn't mean
: >that such would be impossible over a period of a couple of generations. 
: 
: If I see any reduction in the amount of hatred and bigotry in the world,
: I would believe you.  Unfortunately, bigotry and hatred seem to be in
: vogue.

Only by a vocal minority. They are becoming noisier and noisier as they
see their power slip slowly away. The majority could care less one way
or the other, as long as they are not affected. That is why anti-gay
proposals, in most places, have failed.

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