black@pundit.DEC (DON BLACK DTN 261-2739 MS: NIO/N13 LOC: POLE C6) (06/26/85)
>This brings up a (to me) strong argument for government "interference," >to counterbalance the overwhelming forces toward social conformity. >If the government does not allow my neighbours to force me to go to >church, to have the "right" flowers in my garden, and so forth, my >freedom is thereby enhanced. If the government supports my neighbours >in these things (as local governments so often do in the name of >democracy), my freedom is reduced. Government is needed in the name >of freedom, but government must be distinct from direct democracy. >I fear social pressure to conformity more than I fear (here and now) >government controls on my behaviour. >-- > >Martin Taylor Anybody who is overwhelmed by the "forces of social conformity" has something lacking in their personality. That which is lacking is commonly called "intestinal fortitude," "chutzpah," or (pardon the expression) "balls." While I agree that government must be distinct from direct mob-rule democracy, it must still be absolutely limited in its power and scope. Otherwise, the result is tyranny, chaos, and ineluctable determinism. Remember that social pressure cannot put a person in jail or in an internment camp. But a government can. Affirmative Action works the same way. A white male can beat the racism of AA very easily. All he has to do is be better qualified for a position than any other candidate. (Now here's where the Intestinal Fortitude comes in.) Then, upon being denied a position, the mere whisper of "reverse dicrimination suit" is cause to have the application reconsidered. But the key is to be the best to begin with. Hint: being the best candidate also works well for minority group members. --Don Black (...decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pundit!black)