In the Defense of Discrimination

By

Mitchell Gray

Nothing in this country can destroy a mans reputation quicker than a claim of discrimination or racism. To discriminate against another man simply because they have a different skin tone, gender or sexual preference than you is childish, selfish, stupid and wrong on many levels. However wrong racism and discrimination are we must always understand that it is wholly the right of the individual to act as such. To understand what I’m trying to say we are going to have to first discuss ownership and property rights. Everything comes back to property ownership so if you do not have a solid grasp of that there is no way you can progress any further in anything.

All men are self-owners, that is, they have a property right in themselves which no man can claim and which they cannot relinquish. Your body and your life are the one piece of property that can never be traded permanently. For example, a person cannot rightfully be owned by another as this would create a system of slavery. Slavery can only exist through force since no man can actually release his property claim on himself. And since something that exist through force has no authority the “master” actually holds no claim over his slaves. Slavery continues, not because the master has a claim over the bodies of the slaves, but because the slaves allow it to happen. They might feel as though they are in a helpless situation that they can never escape from but in reality they are free to either remain enslaved or to separate themselves from the slave owner even if that separation may be difficult and dangerous. Since all men have an absolute claim over their own bodies no man can force them to act or think in a way that they do not feel appropriate. For example, I cannot force you to walk in a certain way or live a certain way or think a certain way. By doing so I would be suggesting that I hold some claim over your property (your body, life and mind). Furthermore I have no right to tell you how you can use any other property you rightfully own. For example, if you went out and purchased an MP3 player I cannot force you to use it a certain way. If you want to use it as a drink coaster that is your right. If you bought a television and knocked out the screen and used it as a radio I have no right to challenge that. If you have $100 in your pocket I have no right to dictate how you ought to spend that $100. The reason for this is because I hold no claim over that property. Since ownership of property is absolute and total you, as the rightful property owner, are the only one who can decide how that property ought to be utilized. A mans mind is completely part of his body and is such his property. Since it is his property no one has the right to dictate what a person can and cannot think. Understanding this is vital to our discussion as is the understanding that property ownership is absolute. The essence of the argument is thus: No man can control another mans mind since they cannot lay a rightful claim it.

No doubt discrimination is a vile practice and those that employ it are the most debased of all men yet we must recognize that though it is vile and evil it is nonetheless the right of all men to think and act that way. During the 1950’s and 1960’s the subjugated races of this country finally rose up to resist those who placed them in subjugation. While slavery had been dead in this country for many years blacks, Asians, Hispanics and other races were still denied full citizenship through a system of laws known as Jim Crow Laws. Everything from buses to courts to churches were segregated. In every town in the south you’d see signs that read “Whites Only” and “Negro water fountains” and such. Because of such things as the Supreme Court ruling of Brown v. Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 the Jim Crow Laws of the south were finally put to an end and rightfully so when it comes to public things but these laws, while they did a great good, have also done a great badness.

Central to my argument is the philosophy of private ownership and the right to use such property as one wishes. The flaw with these advancements for the equality of all men is that it placed others on a level of inequality when it comes to their absolute ownership of their private property and it is the effect that these laws and other affirmative action laws have created an atmosphere where individuals and the government can violate the private property of private individuals.

Let us assume that I am a store owner who sells electronics. Now assume that I am racist particularly towards the black race (which I’m not in case you are wondering). As the owner of that particular property (the store and the merchandise) I have the absolute right to decide who may enter my store and purchase my merchandise. Assume now I have exercised my right as property owner to deny access to my store for certain individuals (blacks) by placing a sign on the store that says “No Blacks Allowed.” While the community may protest the action I have taken, particularly the black community, they have no right to force me to allow blacks access to my property. That is, they hold no claim over my property and to use force against me would be a violation of my property right. But does not my denying them access to my store violate some right of theirs? Do they not have the right to shop anywhere they wish? Yes, they do, provided the places where they want to shop want them there to begin with. As a property owner I have the absolute right to dictate what happens with my property. You, as a property owner (ownership of your self) can decide where you shall spend your money. If you are a white man who finds my attitude towards blacks immoral (which it is) and offensive (which it is) you have the absolute right as a self-owner to not shop at my store and blacks have the absolute right as self-owners to go somewhere else as well. But you cannot use the government to force me to allow someone on my property just because you think you are right (which you are not if you are going to violate my property rights). The only way you could force the issue is if I am either using coercive force against someone or I am violating their property rights. If a black man enters my store and refuses to leave I have the right to eject them by any means necessary even if that includes violence because they have violated my property rights. But if I should leave my property and proceed to beat you up because you are black to make an example of you then I am the aggressor and the violator of your property rights.

The line of demarcation then is drawn on property rights. I have the right to do as I wish on my property but I cannot violate your property. Likewise you can do as you wish on your property but you cannot violate my property. Neither of us can use force or the threat of force to make another do what we want. Yet if either of us violated the others property we have the absolute right to protect our property with violence if we felt it appropriate. Some might argue that I am violating the property rights of blacks because I am denying them access to my merchandise (electronics) which might make their standard of living improve but that is absurd. No one has a “right” to electronics nor do they have any right to violate my property. No one has a “right” to shop at my store since my store is private property and shopping there is by my invitation. It is therefore a privilege but in no stretch of the imagination a right. Since it is a privilege to shop at my store I can revoke that privilege at any time. It is common even today to see signs in stores that read “We Reserve the Right to Refuse Service to Anyone” which is true. As property owners you can decided who can or cannot shop at your store.

But what about employment? Surely everyone has the right to equal employment! Not really. People have the right to seek employment but no one has a right to it. Rights are something you are born with – they are natural. If employment was a right then we’d all be born with a job to do. Even in the workplace discrimination is the right of the employer. If a black man owns a company and only wants to hire other black men that is totally within his right. As the property owner of not only the business but also the money which he pays the wages of his employees he has the right to decide who will enjoy those things. No one can tell him he must, for diversities sake, hiring a white man or a Hispanic woman because that would be a violation of his property right – the right to decide how he is going to spend his money. You cannot force a person to give his property (his money) to someone who he does not like even if it is for the morally bankrupt reason of racism. As the owner of the business I can decide if I want a staff of nothing but white men, black women, Hassidic Jews or whoever else. Likewise you have the right to not seek employment with me.

Equal pay? Doesn’t everyone enjoy the right to equal pay? Nope. There is no reason why a businessman should be forced to pay a woman or a person of another race the same wage he would men or a member of his race. The money he is paying you comes from his pocket and is his property and he alone has the right to decide how much someone is going to be paid. No one has a “right” to equal pay. They have the “right” to seek a job that will pay them what they are worth but as a business owner I don’t have to pay you equally. If you come to me seeking employment and I agree to hire you, but only for $30,000 per year, and you accept then we have come to a mutual agreement. I have decided that your services are worth $30,000 a year and will gladly pay you for them so long as you maintain your end of the bargain and work productively. You have decided that the time you are going to spend and the labor you are going to exert are worth $30,000. You will gladly trade your time and labor for that $30,000 a year provided I keep my end of the agreement and pay you on a timely fashion and the amount we have agreed to. Say you’ve been at the job for six months and find out Dave is less qualified than you and hired on at the same time but is receiving twice as much money simply because he is of a different race (which the owner prefers, thus you are being discriminated against). Do you have a right to demand equal pay? Yes. Do you have a right to force your employer to pay you an equal wage? No. You can do one of three things: You can either continue working for the agreed upon rate of pay or you can resign and find other employment or you can try to convince your employer to increase your wages. But you cannot sue for equal pay nor can you use the government to force your employer to pay you the same money as Dave.

A private Christian school has the right to deny homosexuals access to their facilities. A business run by blacks has the right to deny whites access to their services. A man has the right to pay other men more than he does women and women likewise have the right to pay other women more than men. We also have the right to protest any business or school or charity that discriminates, provided we do not violate their property (such as keeping people from shopping in a store that discriminates against Asians).

Ultimately ending discrimination is a cultural issue. During the 1950’s and 1960’s people began to realize that denying someone access to something simply because of the color of their skin was wrong. No one is born to be racist. Racism is something that is taught from an early age and as each successive generation grows up seeing people for who they are and not what color their skin is racism and discrimination will eventually go away. Each group of persons has had to fight for equality. Women had to fight for the right to vote and the right to work. Blacks had to fight for the right to be human and live the way others do. Atheist had to fight for their right to disbelieve. Homosexuals are fighting now for those same rights everyone else fought for. With every battle that is won humanity gets a little better.

We must always remember that simply because someone discriminates against another does not mean we have the right to violate their property rights. We have the right to use our moral arguments to pursued people from shopping in their stores or using their services. We can use our moral strength to teach others, especially the younger generations, that discrimination is wrong. But we cannot under any circumstances use coercive force against another simply because they don’t like us.