Are Anti-Racial Discrimination Laws Good or Bad?

[Winston]

I have a question. What do you think of the anti-racial discrimination laws in America? Are they a good thing or a bad and stupid idea? Do they help protect minorities, or simply create taboos and keep mouths shut but change nothing? Do they make any positive difference?

In other countries, people are allowed to state preferences in age, race and sex in their job/help wanted ads or apartment/room for rent ads. But not in America of course, where political correctness rules.

Is it part of human nature to be racist or have racial preferences? If so, can laws or political correctness change that? Do anti-racial discrimination laws really help anyone? What about affirmative action programs?

Realistically, I don't see how laws can have any affect on racial discrimination. Anyone can get around it easily. For example, although all employers will say "We do not discriminate based on age, race or sex" to not get into trouble, it doesn't mean anything in reality. Any employers can hide their preferences in age, race or sex, so that if someone applies for a position who does not fit the preference, he can simply make a polite excuse for not hiring them, such as: "We will get back to you" (and never do) or "We found someone else more qualified", etc. And no racial discrimination will ever be known. Same with sex or age discrimination. Anyone can get around such an anti-discrimination law and get away with it easily. So what's the point of it if it doesn't prevent any discrimination? All it does it prevent the open admission of discrimination, but does nothing to curb discrimination itself.

So logically, such anti-discrimination laws are pointless. People will just put up a non-racist facade to comply with the laws, but can still be totally racist, as long as they don't admit it openly.

Personally, I think the government has no right to tell a business that it can't have racial, sexual or age preferences in who they hire. That is the employer's business. If he feels comfortable hiring only members of a certain race, gender or age range, for whatever reason, then that's his business and his right. The government has no right to interfere with that - anymore than it has a right to tell people that they can't discriminate in love, dating and relationships based on race, age or sex. Same with renting out a room or apartment.

However, if there are extreme circumstances, such as every grocery store and supermarket in the southern USA refuses to let ethnic groups shop there - essentially starving them, then I believe the government should step in and do something, by either forcing those businesses to not discriminate against their customers, or by setting up non-discriminatory public food markets for them. When it comes to life and death, or essential needs, then some protection and assistance should be given.

Same with racial violence. There should obviously be laws to protect people from being physically attacked for their race. People should be allowed to walk in public areas safely. That's a given.

But anti-discrimination laws in hiring or renting out properties is another matter, for it interferes with the rights, freedoms and preferences of those doing the hiring or renting.

You cannot eliminate racism with laws or political correctness. Racism is not a good or bad thing, unless it results in violence. It is simply a preference, and everyone has preferences and tastes, because obviously, not everything is the same. Race is not a social construction. Races are inherently different in many ways. Genes are different. Genders are inherently different. And people are different. Some things look better, more attractive or more appealing than others, and vice versa.

What do you all think?

[Billy]

It depends. The question is what do the majority in the USA want. If they want to have equal people then affirmative action is necessary. But if they think, that they want a state where individual freedom is more important then affirmative action is not necessary.

[Derp]

It would be better to not have laws like affirmative action so that when you see a sign that says:

"Will only hire whites!"

or

"Will only hire black!"

You will know straight up what the employer is really looking for.

Segregation needs to take place again. Blacks were doing much better during segregation than integration, and most blacks will agree.

[Winston]

Why were blacks doing better during segregation? In what way?

If that's so, then why do blacks hail Martin Luther King as a hero and claimed that the Civil Rights movement of the 60's helped them?

[onezero4u]

the govt playing moral legislature is a joke and plain pain in the ass.

remember jim crow laws??

i want to know the racial - gender - political leanings of everyone so i know where i stand with them & where i should vote, support and spend my money.

right now it seems about any and every group can criticize except white straight males....they get bashed if they mention anything but compliments for minorities, gays or woman. sad but true

legislating morality is always a failure.

[momopi]

Title VII, Civil Rights Act (1964):

"It shall not be an unlawful employment practice for an employer to hire and employ employees, for an employment agency to classify, or refer for employment any individual, for a labor organization to classify its membership or to classify or refer for employment any individual, or for an employer, labor organization, or joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining programs to admit or employ any individual in any such program, on the basis of his religion, sex, or national origin in those certain instances where religion, sex, or national origin is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise"

[MattHanson1990]

Winston you're spot on. Indeed, employers and landlords are hiding their preferences to which people to hire and rent out to respectively. For instance, many bosses are women these days, and most of them prefer to only hire women, unless a man was in the top 10 percent or some uneducated loser. And then there are managers who prefer technology over humans to perform the work, just to save money and time.

Employers and HR abide by the law just by saying "we do not discriminate based on gender, race, disability", but somehow they get around the anti-discrimination law by treating the job market EXACTLY like the dating scene. The application process being done online plays a big role in making the job search more competitive and frustrating than ever before. Most of the time you get no responses. Heck, the same thing can be said with online dating. Nowadays it's taboo to go directly to hiring managers, just like it's taboo to simply approach women in public. Then, both have their share of know-it-alls, job coaches and PUAs. Even if you get hired, female bosses and coworkers treat you like shit in order to get you fired/laid off or quit.

Men are discriminate against in the workforce because those female bosses were taught to not need men and that men are potential creeps. Female bosses fear that men will hit on their female coworkers, and many male workers were terminated for "sexual harassment".

Both the dating scene AND the job market in the U.S. are screwed beyond repair.

[Traveler]

In an interview with Reason TV, author Jason Riley discusses how government policies, including anti-poverty measures and affirmative action programs, have inadvertently hurt the black population. According to Riley, these policies -- intended to help black Americans -- have only caused economic problems:

Minimum wage laws and other anti-poverty programs have priced many workers out of the labor force, explains Riley. And wage laws that make it more expensive for businesses to hire people hurt the less skilled, less experienced workers the most. In the 1940s and 1950s, prior to these policies, the rate of black participation in the labor force was much higher. In fact, the black poverty rate fell by 40 percentage points between 1940 and 1960 before the implementation of these programs.

Riley says that affirmative action policies mismatch students with schools, giving racial preferences to students who often lack the academic credentials of their peers. As a result, many minority students ended up dropping out of colleges or moving to easier majors. He explains that when California imposed a ban on racial preferences in 1996, black graduation rates rose by more than 50 percent, illustrating how affirmative action policies were limiting black students' success.

How can this economic situation be improved? According to Riley, one answer is increasing marriage rates. Married black couples have a single-digit poverty rate, says Riley, whereas the poverty rate among black Americans overall is far higher. Unfortunately, the number of two-parent households within the black population has fallen dramatically, resulting in higher poverty rates.

Additionally, Riley contends school choice programs are some of the best ways to improve outcomes for black Americans. Inner city neighborhoods are especially in need of strong schools, he says, and bringing educational choice to those children would open doors for success further down the line.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=24826

Black families were much more intact and crime rates were much lower in black communities during segregation. Affirmative Action has hurt blacks. It has led to a lot of blacks ending up in academic environments that they are unprepared for and then they often drop out, but at least the government gets to feel good about promoting diversity. There has been a shift in emphasis from equal opportunity to equal outcomes. We see the same thing with feminists when they talk about the gender pay gap and the lack of female scientists, CEOs, and politicians.

[droid]

Personally, I think the government has no right to tell a business that it can't have racial, sexual or age preferences in who they hire. That is the employer's business. If he feels comfortable hiring only members of a certain race, gender or age range, for whatever reason, then that's his business and his right. The government has no right to interfere with that - anymore than it has a right to tell people that they can't discriminate in love, dating and relationships based on race, age or sex. Same with renting out a room or apartment.

Yeah that's the libertarian position on this, it kind of makes sense. Likewise for who you want to serve in your business etc.

However, if there are extreme circumstances, such as every grocery store and supermarket in the southern USA refuses to let ethnic groups shop there - essentially starving them, then I believe the government should step in and do something, by either forcing those businesses to not discriminate against their customers, or by setting up non-discriminatory public food markets for them. When it comes to life and death, or essential needs, then some protection and assistance should be given.

But those are extreme hypotheticals which -i think- are not backed by reality. Again, from a libertarian standpoint, the economic pressure is too great not allow the gaps being filled right away.

Same with racial violence. There should obviously be laws to protect people from being physically attacked for their race. People should be allowed to walk in public areas safely. That's a given.

Considering motives is meaningless and only distorts everything.
If there is equality under the law, then an attack is just an attack, and should be prosecuted for what it is.
And even if there is 'inequality' under the law, say for example if a certain group was declared "80% human", EVEN then, i'd say a full 80% of the penalty
should be imposed on the attacker. But a crime's motives should still be disregarded.

[MattHanson1990]

In an interview with Reason TV, author Jason Riley discusses how government policies, including anti-poverty measures and affirmative action programs, have inadvertently hurt the black population. According to Riley, these policies -- intended to help black Americans -- have only caused economic problems:

Minimum wage laws and other anti-poverty programs have priced many workers out of the labor force, explains Riley. And wage laws that make it more expensive for businesses to hire people hurt the less skilled, less experienced workers the most. In the 1940s and 1950s, prior to these policies, the rate of black participation in the labor force was much higher. In fact, the black poverty rate fell by 40 percentage points between 1940 and 1960 before the implementation of these programs.

Riley says that affirmative action policies mismatch students with schools, giving racial preferences to students who often lack the academic credentials of their peers. As a result, many minority students ended up dropping out of colleges or moving to easier majors. He explains that when California imposed a ban on racial preferences in 1996, black graduation rates rose by more than 50 percent, illustrating how affirmative action policies were limiting black students' success.

How can this economic situation be improved? According to Riley, one answer is increasing marriage rates. Married black couples have a single-digit poverty rate, says Riley, whereas the poverty rate among black Americans overall is far higher. Unfortunately, the number of two-parent households within the black population has fallen dramatically, resulting in higher poverty rates.

Additionally, Riley contends school choice programs are some of the best ways to improve outcomes for black Americans. Inner city neighborhoods are especially in need of strong schools, he says, and bringing educational choice to those children would open doors for success further down the line.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=24826

Black families were much more intact and crime rates were much lower in black communities during segregation. Affirmative Action has hurt blacks. It has led to a lot of blacks ending up in academic environments that they are unprepared for and then they often drop out, but at least the government gets to feel good about promoting diversity. There has been a shift in emphasis from equal opportunity to equal outcomes. We see the same thing with feminists when they talk about the gender pay gap and the lack of female scientists, CEOs, and politicians.

Then I read somewhere that black men have it the worst in the US job market and are facing permanent unemployment.

[Moretorque]

The net po rn industry, that's about all that will be left of America shortly.