COLUMN: Equality or Privilege

From Marc Teillon's "The Public Pillory," Fall '95 Grassroots leader Harold Wood says the crusade "is going to make 187 look like kindergarten." One can only wonder what the elites will do to out-perform their fiasco in last year's election. Before the vote on 187, the Left and Right establishments did everything in their power to stop the flood of the initiative support. Every group from the New York Times to the Heritage Foundation took their turn in lecturing the masses on the merits of giving people who have no right to be in the country the same benefits as those who do. When that didn't work, they did what most people do when their arguments have no logical justification -- they tried to scare their opponents into submission. Prop 187 is not about law and order, they cried, it's about race. Soon charges of bigotry and racism poured forth and investigations were done on the activists' backgrounds to make sure none were "white supremists." Even Jack Kemp tried his hand in fear-mongering. "Does anyone seriously doubt Rodriquez would be more likely to appear to be illegal than Anglo children named, say, Jones?" Despite the efforts of think-tanks, journalists and quarterbacks, Proposition 187 was passed overwhelmingly. In the new populist movement, the elites are at it again. Once more they are manipulating symbols of controversial attitudes to play off the fears of the masses. In two separate syndicated columns, Jesse Jackson and Carl Rowan each gave a sample of the race-baiting that will once again be the opposition's dominant tactic. In Jackson's column, he compared California Governor Pete Wilson to Lester Maddox, the former Georgia governor who vehemently fought against integration in the '60s. "Having profited from beating up on largely Hispanic and Asian immigrants, the governor now wants to appeal to 'angry white men' by beating up on women, African Americans and other minorities. Maddox would be proud." Rowan lined his own inflammatory column with cute little phrases like "rabid racial discrimination," "apoplectic spasms of bigotry" and "activist racism." He even came up with this little dandy -- "Crying 'quotas' and 'reverse discrimination' is to conservative Republicans what murmuring 'Da-da' is to a baby." Here are two men who derive their power from the fact that they are black and that they ostensibly fight for blacks in the political spectrum. Because of their overt racial consciousness and ardent support for a racial spoils system, they waived their rights to protest racism a long time ago. Besides their hypocrisy, they aren't telling the truth. Take a look at the ballot proposal and you'll see it was written by sane, "color-blind" adults, not ga-ga goo-gooing Neo-Nazis frothing at the mouth. The proposal states, "Neither the state of California nor any of its political subdivisions or agents shall use race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin as a criterion for either discriminating against, or granting preferential treatment to any individual or group in the operation of the state's system of public employment, public education or public contracting." Nowhere does it say anything about re-segregating the public school system or enacting Jim Crow II. The proposal is simply a movement towards the classic liberal model where individuals have the freedom to hire whomever they choose based on their own criteria. Some individuals may decide race to be the central issue in an employment decision. Some may consider members of their church as the only acceptable applicants. Still others may choose to hire members of a group they consider less fortunate. Most will probably offer jobs to the workers who bring the most to the firm, be it skills, customers, etc. But criticizing these hiring practices is irrelevant. When freedom prevails, individuals have the right to make these decisions for themselves. Affirmative action programs, on the other hand, are not about equality or freedom, but privilege and compulsion. Employers are told that they better have a certain ratio of minorities hired or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Justice will come marching in to impose monstrous fines and ruin the company's reputation. Employers are thus persecuted for "discrimination" if they do not practice preferential treatment. White males are now guilty of acts in which they never took part. In fact, some of these so called "crimes" were perfectly legal at the time they occurred. If society decides that shooting someone is wrong and makes it illegal, should the victims and their off-spring be allowed to shoot anyone who supposedly benefitted from the legal shootings? Is there a certain level of shootings by victims that will right the past injustices? Such an inherently flawed system like affirmative action not only denies individuals their human dignity, but further divides society into groups based on what people are, not who they are. Racial tensions are increasing in California and the rest of the country. There are only two ways for the country to go. We can have a color-blind society where people are free to hire and associate with whomever they choose. Or, we can have a special privilege system based on race and gender where opposing interests slug it out in the courts for their "fair" shares. The new movement in California proposes the former. Though the measure does not peel back all civil rights legislation, it is a step in the right direction. Human nature may cause people to be ambitious and greedy and even a little racist, but that is the price of freedom. If the latter is continued, then white males have no other choice but to direct those privileges their own way. I won't claim any rights to special favors for the betterment of society, but you can be damn sure I'm not going to put my sons and my family at a disadvantage in the name of equality and justice. Will Californians vote for freedom in '96? Or will white males continue to be sacrificed on the altar of egalitarianism? Let prudence, not fear, give the answer. Marc Teillon is a junior Finance major from Liverpool, N.Y. The Public Pillory appears alternate Wednesdays.