Affirmative action programs provide jobs but no guarantees that workers will get the opportunity to perform. That means women and people of color in America have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness right up until the moment we step into the workplace. Once inside, companies grant us the right to file grievances and lawsuits. I, for one, would rather just be treated well.
So writes Linda S. Wallace, President of LSW Communications, in yesterday's Christian Scientist Monitor. She also writes about how she turned down a promotion when she found out they were only offering it to her because she was black. This is a brave and principled woman I'd be proud to know.
The criticism she'll take for her courage for speaking out will doubtless be withering. Speaking up about the problem of special rights for minorities is tough. Doubtless she'll be attacked as a traitor, a sellout, a rigid ideologue, and a Tom (Tomette?). I sense she has spine enough to stand up to it.
Two other interesting pieces on Special Rights worth reading: Shikha Dalmia and Henry Payne's piece in last December's Reason magazine, where they discuss data from Zogby and other pollsters showing that racial preferences have far less support among blacks than is generally supposed. There's also another good, more recent analysis from Shikha Dalmia in NRO, analyzing where the Bush administration is probably going with the issue of race and sex discrimination.
(Once again, John Rosenberg, one of Cyberspace's most passionate civil libertarians, was on the spot with that Christian Science Monitor story that others have missed.)
If she's speaking of Affirmative Action... it's crap. I've said it before. I'll always say it. Good people would rather be able to perform well and get a job based on their merits and expertise, not their race, gender or sexual preference.
Special Rights suck. No one should get "special rights". We should all have the exact SAME rights... no more, no less.
Unfortunately, many people are mistakenly confusing "special protection" with "special rights" and Affirmative Action. They're not related. Not at all. No matter how anyone attempts to slant their interpretations of them.
Good for Linda. I doubt she'll get much heat unless it comes from those who got where they are due less to their own initiative than to a quota system.
The reality is that the very civil rights laws that "protect" people like Ms. Wallace have been read by the courts to mandate those types of quotas and racial set-asides.
Black people like her who speak up are frequently attacked in the most vicious manner. Uncle Tom, Oreo Cookie, sellout, traitor--or, worst of all, "sellout to the far right." That's sort of thing is thrown at people like her all the time.
There's a lot to learn about this. If a company does not have enough of the right kind of people, that is often sufficient evidence, in court, that your company is in violation of the law. This opens a company up to severe legal penalties and to draconian lawsuits. Quotas and set-asides have been the only consistently successful defense.
This isn't right-wing ranting. It's reality.
John Rosenberg's Discriminations web site has a lot of good information on the kind of legal shenanigans that have been going on over issues like this. the article I posted this morning on the Civil Rights Act of 1964 also has some pertinent information.
I rest my case.
Truely tremendous blog!