Replies to post #182 on The Free Zone Board

[smart_sassy]

The End Of Racism? You Can't Be Serious!/mikkj


Yeah, I thought racism was over until I befriended a black man about 6 years ago from work. The things that he tells me are incredible. Imagine, being called the "N" word to your face for absolutely nothing.

I experienced it first hand sometimes when we would go to lunch. People treated me different (and usually not nicer) at a restarant.

He is also a photographer and when he goes to the airport he makes sure he leaves enough time because his equipment always gets searched. I know another white photographer and that does not happen all the time.

The acts may be more subtle (sometimes), but they still exist. Sadly, I am not sure they will ever go away.

[Spallenzani]

mikkj - The End Of Racism? You Can't Be Serious!

You really believe that racism is a greater problem to the black community than teenage pregnancy, overall illegitimacy, anti-work ethic mentality, anti-achievement mentality, anti-education mentality, etc.? If you believe that, you have no right to be calling anyone else on this forum an extremist or a follower of propaganda.

Do I believe that racism still exists and is a problem? Yes. And it will always be. No matter how many social experiments and societal engineering run by the government, racism will never be eradicated. Whatever you may think about Affirmative Action in the past, it has served whatever purpose it was meant to serve and should be ended.

In an age of huge corporations, which you and your fellow socialists never fail to criticize, you seem to forget that corporations are the most colorblind entities of all. The bottom line is profit, and any useless inefficiency that strays from that goal will be punished by the market. There have been so many frivolous lawsuits lately, most of which end up being dismissed, on the grounds of racial discrimination by a huge corporation. Pizza Hut was accused of discriminating when it refused to deliver to a very dangerous crime area. After multiple delivery boys were killed, the court realized that the company had reasonable grounds to not want to deliver, and the case was thrown out. Kozmo had a similar case recently, dealing with complaints that they did not serve the black community in Atlanta. Kozmo chose to serve only certain parts of metro Atlanta that had a high concentration of Internet access. Because the black community did not have a high enough concentration of Internet users, it would not have made sense for Kozmo to set up services in that area. I do not know what the result of that case was, but I believe it was settled out of court.

The last case deals with Microsoft, and I will let you read the article for yourself, although I am sure you will not like the source.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=21218

If you don't like the source, you can read the same article here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/minorities-ms.html
or here: http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=583

As a member of an often discriminated against minority myself, I feel that it is unfair for you to accuse me of not knowing what I am talking about. I have had to deal with anti-Semitic slurs, vandalism, and even physical attacks against one of my relatives.

To believe in freedom and a free-market, and then argue against freedom of association is blatant hypocrisy. If two people choose to voluntarily enter into a mutually beneficial agreement with each other, who's business is it to tell them that they can or cannot? If I choose not to sell my car to my life long enemy, why should the government force me to do this against my will? Even if they did use this type of force, and they do, who is this helping? If the government forces a KKK member to hire a black or Jewish man to work in his store, who is benefiting from this situation? Obviously not the KKK member, as he has to work with a pay for a person whom he hates. And the same goes with the Jew or the black; he must spend all day with a person who he knows hates him. Is this type of action going to change anyone's opinions? Obviously not.

I contend that what makes greater social change is an adherence to the laws of the market. If a KKK member chooses only to hire white supremacists who share his views, he will be paying a hefty economic price by either paying more for the same level of worker he could have hired for less, or by being forced to settle for a lesser worker just because he happens to share that worker's philosophy. Sooner or later, these types of employers will be driven out of the market by competitors. This type of market change does take time, but it is more permanent and less forceful than changing societal views by government mandate.

I believe this mentality of pointing out and legislating protections against racism where it exists is actually amplifying the problem. Instead of concentrating on such a divisive issue, we as a society should be concentrating on the greater problems threatening the minority population.