3 ms·

The problem with this seemingly simple philosophy is that it results in minorities being ostracised. "Democratising social norms" turns into "Outlawing anything

by growse 7y ago

The problem with this seemingly simple philosophy is that it results in minorities being ostracised. "Democratising social norms" turns into "Outlawing anything the majority won't tolerate". Suddenly you have towns where black people can't live, because no-one will do business with them. Sure, "healthy competition" should solve this problem - there's money to be made! But people are not perfectly economically rational. We are tribal creatures of prejudice, predisposed to subconsciously reject and suspect anything or anyone as "different". Laws are often made to protect minorities, because history shows us time and time again that an unchecked majority of people can be real dicks.

wolco 7y ago
How far do you want to go? Should a company be forced to offer products to minorities? Say a comb maker who creates combs for the straight hair market should they be forced to offer hair picks? Not doing so leaves them ostracised.
- mijamo 7y ago
  In France it is straight illegal to refuse to sell to a customer without a legitimate reason. Whether a reason is legitimate is up to court interpretation but not liking the skin color or sexual orientation would not qualify. A racist tattoo at a shoot range would probably. And it doesn't cause any trouble. B2B is not concerned obviously.
- asjw 7y ago
  As far as possible. Of course companies have to offer products to minorities, have you ever seen parking spots for handicapped people in the mall? Of course a restaurant has to ask you if you have some intolerance before serving you food that could contain allergens. USA Better start to learn that 300 millions people don't make the entire world.
waterhouse 7y ago
> Laws are often made to protect minorities, because history shows us time and time again that an unchecked majority of people can be real dicks. Under democracy, a majority of people can decide what laws there are, and inflict their dickishness as they wish. Laws are often made to oppress minorities. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws See also part I of this essay: https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/02/21/current-affairs-some-puzzles-for-libertarians-treated-as-writing-prompts-for-short-stories/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/02/21/current-affairs-some-p...
- growse 7y ago
  While there are obvious exceptions, much of the time the majority has some empathy with traditionally oppressed minorities and votes for politicians who make laws to protect them. > Under democracy, a majority of people can decide what laws there are Also worth pointing out that under most democracies, this isn't true. The people decide which people should decide what laws there should be. It's an important difference.

by growse 7y ago

wolco 7y ago

How far do you want to go? Should a company be forced to offer products to minorities? Say a comb maker who creates combs for the straight hair market should they be forced to offer hair picks? Not doing so leaves them ostracised.

mijamo 7y ago
In France it is straight illegal to refuse to sell to a customer without a legitimate reason. Whether a reason is legitimate is up to court interpretation but not liking the skin color or sexual orientation would not qualify. A racist tattoo at a shoot range would probably. And it doesn't cause any trouble. B2B is not concerned obviously.
asjw 7y ago
As far as possible. Of course companies have to offer products to minorities, have you ever seen parking spots for handicapped people in the mall? Of course a restaurant has to ask you if you have some intolerance before serving you food that could contain allergens. USA Better start to learn that 300 millions people don't make the entire world.

waterhouse 7y ago

> Laws are often made to protect minorities, because history shows us time and time again that an unchecked majority of people can be real dicks. Under democracy, a majority of people can decide what laws there are, and inflict their dickishness as they wish. Laws are often made to oppress minorities. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws See also part I of this essay: https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/02/21/current-affairs-some-puzzles-for-libertarians-treated-as-writing-prompts-for-short-stories/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/02/21/current-affairs-some-p...

growse 7y ago
While there are obvious exceptions, much of the time the majority has some empathy with traditionally oppressed minorities and votes for politicians who make laws to protect them. > Under democracy, a majority of people can decide what laws there are Also worth pointing out that under most democracies, this isn't true. The people decide which people should decide what laws there should be. It's an important difference.