charlie@cca.UUCP (Charlie Kaufman) (09/08/83)
Comment on:
It should be noted that reverse discrimination in the USA is
legal. I.E. you can hire a woman and reject a man of equal
qualification on the grounds of sex, to implement affirmative
action quotas.
This is substantiated by case law, and also seems to be the
practice within the Bell System.
Discrimination of any form is illegal anywhere in the great US of A.
Always has been; always will be. Affirmative action has nothing to do
with reverse discrimination; your first paragraph is a non sequitur. If
you slip up in this manner again, you will be reassigned to a group
debating punctuation for the next edition of the newspeak dictionary.
--Charlie Kaufman
charlie@cca
...decvax!cca!charliesteven@qubix.UUCP (Steven Maurer) (09/08/83)
For those of you who were unaware of the difference between
discrimination and quotas ("affirmitave action"), as outlined in
Charlie Kaufman's message let me clarify:
discrimination is unfairly denying someone a privalage based upon
race, creed, color, or sex.
"affirmative action" is unfairly denying someone a privalage BASED
UPON A LAW.
That the law is discriminitory is of no consequence:
Laws, by definition, are not illegal
1 / .-. \/ o___\
1/ /_ /\ o /
Steven Maurereich@uiuccsb.UUCP (09/12/83)
#R:cca:-566000:uiuccsb:12700003:000:963
uiuccsb!eich Sep 11 20:35:00 1983
To implement affirmative action quotas, the Law must distinguish among the
various parties and determine who shall benefit from preferential treatment
and of necessity who shall suffer it. I.e. the Law must *discriminate*.
Because current statutes and policies have determined that formerly oppressed
(or otherwise agrieved) groups shall now benefit by a discrimination, this
"affirmative action" has become known as "reverse" discrimination.
Was Charlie Kaufmann being ironic when he wielded Orwell's neologism "newspeak,"
or was he just mongering its currently debased form, a la the tendentious
National Council of Teachers of English? Smug declamations like Kaufmann's
coupled with abusages of Orwell serve only to instruct students of the new
newspeak, i.e. the practice of labeling "newspeak" any clear identification
("reverse discrimination") applied to modern statist euphemisms ("affirmative
action"). Orwell would have appreciated the irony.