VaguelyH,
If you’re not bisexual, you discriminate.
I’d still take issue with that, as it can be “rational” (in the colloquial sense) to discriminate/act on certain stereotypes depending on circumstances. I would find discrimination repugnant if the circumstances are such that the discriminator has the opportunity to gain the relevant information but chooses not to or ignores the information so as to act on the stereotype (e.g. an employer hiring a person based on race), but discrimination can be understandable if it is very costly or just unreasonable to gain information (e.g. a cab driver ignoring a black man in a bad neighborhood). And, of course, there are times when someone simply must discriminate, like casting only white males to play Abraham Lincoln, refusing to admit straight men to a lesbian bar, allowing only Catholics to run Catholic schools, etc.
Still, welcome. We seem to have quite a few active left-libertarians lately, which is nice to see.
Hey OP, welcome.
Can you please define “laissez-faire socialism”? It is first time I see these two words in such a way (and I am still newbie in economics in general sense, so..)..
P.S. I think, some people get similar reaction when they hear about “anarcho-capitalism”, though. haha.
haha I see what you did here.
“if you’re not bisexual, you discriminate”
Haha, did you get that from a Walter Block’s joke?
LibertyS, you know what I mean. Also, I am bisexual, so that kinda backfired.
Michael, not letting straight men into a lesbian bar isn’t prejudice/discrimination. Not letting lesbians into a bar that isn’t themed around sexual orientation is. Not letting black people play Abraham Lincoln in a play isn’t discrimination. Not letting black people come to the play is. What I mean is racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. I call such things “prejudice” or “discrimination”.
Maik, I guess by laissez-faire socialism I mean a non-hierarchial, cooperative economy in a free-market society, like mutualism or genuinely anarchistic forms of ancom.
I too hate racism, sexism, statism but that’s just me.
I’m up to my ears in isms.
Either none of that is discrimination, or all of it is. Why would you say that someone who’s black can’t play Abraham Lincoln? Plus, I’m pretty sure that casting actors for a play is entirely based on discrimination, if you look at it that way.
Michael, not letting straight men into a lesbian bar isn’t prejudice/discrimination.
Of course it is. “discriminate - recognize or perceive the difference” The straight men are being distinguished from their not-straight, not-male counter parts and being excluded due to it.
Not letting lesbians into a bar that isn’t themed around sexual orientation is. Not letting black people play Abraham Lincoln in a play isn’t discrimination. Not letting black people come to the play is. What I mean is racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. I call such things “prejudice” or “discrimination”.
Picking and choosing between forms of discrimination you find to be acceptable doesn’t change anything about its nature.
Was it prejudiced of me that, looking at your picture, I assumed you were bisexual?
I have a problem with uniform opposition to prejudice, because there is such a thing as rational prejudice. I strongly believe most prejudices are rational. I’m a probabilistic thinker so I prejudge all of the time. If I moved from a city with a murder rate of 2 per 100,000 to a city with a murder rate of 20 per 100,000, I would be prejudiced against the people in that city by thinking that they were 10 times more likely to murder me than the people in the first city, even though they’ve never actually murdered me.
Good… can you drop “ancap”, then? It’s an utterly bizarre term leading to all sorts of semantic confusion.
My thought on this:
On discrimination:
I agree here with OP, but there needs to be some clarifications. What in our society is called discrimination, 99 percents of the time it is NOT, in a sense, that it is the same, as picking a partner for sex. People “discriminate”, but it is not a real definition of it. Picking man over woman for a job is not a discrimination either. Picking white person over black - too (though, there may be exceptions).
According to wiki, it is prejudicial treatment of an individual based solely on their membership in a certain group or category. It is irrational and mostly, if it is not (if person is aware of it), it is for bad reasons. Bad parenting? Kids playground?
But yeah, I agree with critiques in most part, because it is very ambiguous concept and almost lost its meaning in a modern world, where everything can be accused of it.
It didn’t backfire. You’ve staked out a position whereby anyone who is heterosexual is engaging in sexual discrimination. Is that correct?
Also, I have no idea what you mean.
Do you feel a division of labor is beneficial to an economy? If so, how do you reconcile the division of labor with non-hierarchy? Are we all supposed to grow our own food and weave our own clothes?
And run our own fiber to the backbones.
Also, not to mention that many people desire hierarchy in businesses. A lot of people want to be told what to do and a lot of people don’t. This is how hierarchy in business naturally and voluntarily forms. In many cases, without it, the business wouldn’t last long.
True.
vaguelyhumanoid, pre-judgment is the best (and only) alternative we have to POST-judgment, i.e. omniscience (or choosing an action after exercising it i.e. with full knowledge of the resulting state of affairs produced by it). Discrimination, too is inherent in action. My preference for (or choice of) an apple over an orange, is an act of discrimination. My preference to move my finger over keeping it still is an act of discriminating one state of affairs over another.
Z.
Prejudice comes (if I am correct, English is not my native language) a pre judgement. So you act without
having all the information. That’s not wrong, that’s necessary for survival.
Most people feel that stereotyping is wrong and unfair.
Why should one person be affected by the actions or qualities of the rest of his or her demographic? Of course, people are individuals with their own moral values (or lack of), intelligence, and talents. Stereotyping is, however, a method that people use, consciously or subconsciously, as an efficient way of economizing on information costs.
For example, if somebody offered you $1 million to solve a complex mathematical problem and, furthermore, you could choose anybody on a university campus to help you, I doubt you would choose the Paris Hilton–type sorority girl or the Abercrombie and Fitch–wearing fraternity boy. Now consider the young man wearing glasses and a pocket protector in his short-sleeve, button-down shirt: would you not think that he is a better bet?
From Online Eytmology Dictionary:
- **prejudice (n.)** [](http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=prejudice)
- late 13c., from O.Fr. *prejudice* (13c.), from M.L. *prejudicium* "injustice," from L. *praejudicium* "prior judgment," from *prae-* "before" (see __*pre-*__) + *judicium* "judgment," from *judex* (gen. *judicis*) "judge." The notion is of "preconceived opinion;" the verb meaning "to affect or fill with prejudice" is from c.1600. Related: *Prejudiced*; *prejudicing*.
- **judge (v.)** [](http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=judge)
- early 13c., "to form an opinion about," from Anglo-Fr. *juger*, from O.Fr. *jugier* "to judge," from L. *judicare* "to judge," from *judicem* (nom. *judex*) "to judge," a compound of *jus* "right, law" + root of *dicere* "to say" (see __*diction*__). Related: *Judged*; *judging*. The O.E. word was *deman* (see __*doom*__). Meaning "to try and pronounce sentence upon (someone) in a court" is from late 13c. The noun is from c.1300. In Hebrew history, it refers to a war leader vested with temporary power (e.g. *Book of Judges*), from L. *judex* being used to translate Heb. *shophet*.
- **opinion** [](http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=opinion)
- c.1300, from O.Fr. *opinion* (12c.), from L. *opinionem* (nom. *opinio*) "opinion, conjecture, what one thinks," from stem of *opinari* "think, judge, suppose, opine," from PIE _*op-_ "to choose."