Tim May wrote:
By the way, market forces are often so powerful in ending discrimination that it is _states_ (governments) which seek to maintain discrimination.
<<south africa and germany>> You can throw the post-Civil War American south into the mix, too. Some Southern politicians were distressed that shop-keepers were dealing with negroes, and passed laws to prevent that. This resulted in the first section of the 14th Amendment (for our non-American readers, the key point is all American citizens get equal protection of the laws). It wasn't individual discrimination that was a serious problem; as Tim says, self-interest drove at least _some_ merchants to ignore any prejudices they might harbor. It was state-mandated discrimination that caused the federal remedy.
Markets aren't "perfect" (not that such a thing has a lot of meaning), but greed and self-interest usually results in less discrimination than when governments are the ones enforcing the laws. Enlightened self-interest usually means that merchants deal with _everyone_. It takes a very powerful reason for shunning or expulsion to occur.
-- Steve Furlong, Computer Condottiere Have GNU, will travel 518-374-4720 sfurlong@acmenet.net