Raemon comments on Richard Dawkins: Should employers be blind to private beliefs? [link] - Less Wrong

4 Post author: Kevin 25 January 2011 07:57PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (43)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 26 January 2011 10:32:46AM 2 points [-]

In my opinion, employers shouldn't be blind to private beliefs or race or gender or any of the other protected classifications.

Disagree.

They ideally should be blind, however I don't think rigid qutas or equating inequality of outcome with inequality of opportunity is helping anyone.

In my estimation the best solution currently available to us is to keep government completely blind on ethnicity or even give preference to some groups while letting the private sector complete freedom to choose in this regard and let the market handle it.

Comment author: Raemon 27 January 2011 04:01:20AM 1 point [-]

In my estimation the best solution currently available to us is to keep government completely blind on ethnicity or even give preference to some groups while letting the private sector complete freedom to choose in this regard and let the market handle it.

We tried this. We made up laws to change it because there was blatant, rampant discrimination that was not based on any kind of empirical data.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 27 January 2011 05:33:09AM 1 point [-]

When did we try this?

I believe we pretty quickly went from government mandated discrimination, to government mandated reverse discrimination/affirmative action.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 27 January 2011 05:57:50AM 1 point [-]

I believe we pretty quickly went from government mandated discrimination, to government mandated reverse discrimination/affirmative action.

That's not true. Although how not true this is depends on what governments you are talking about. In the US, the federal government was integrated many years before much of society (note for example that one early success of integration was in the armed services). However, it is true that some state governments engaged in large-scale and systematic discrimination until the mid 1960s and that that was forced out close to the same time that anti-discrimination measures on private businesses were passed.

Comment author: Raemon 27 January 2011 04:19:13PM *  0 points [-]

I had actually been thinking of "No Irish Need Apply" among other things, but then I looked it up and that turned out to be an English thing, and the commonly accepted ubiquity of it in America was a myth. So I'm gonna hold off until I've double checked the rest of the things I was thinking of. In the meantime, what exactly do you mean by government mandated discrimination and when are you saying it ended?

(And as Joshua notes, what country are we talking about here? I live in America, so that's what I was thinking of)

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 28 January 2011 01:03:15AM 3 points [-]

I'm referring to the Jim Crow laws, as well as related federal laws.