As the Michigan battle over affirmative action heats up, and issues of race and sex politics continue to play a huge role in academia, a larger issue is being lost. A core assumption behind “affirmative action” and “equal opportunity” is that individuals have property rights in their jobs, or the right to at least be considered for their jobs. It would be unjust and unfair if employers discriminated on racial, religious, or sexual grounds; unfair and unjust if restaurants or stores did likewise with their customers.
But let us turn the argument around.
Should we force prospective employees to interview for jobs on an equal-opportunity basis, or force customers to shop at stores or dine at restaurants on an equal-opportunity basis? Are we to file lawsuits and make criminals of customers or prospective employees who decide to provide their labor or business on a discriminatory basis? There is no law — nor any proposed law — that says workers need to allocate their work proportionately among bosses of various races and sexes (e.g., work at least X% of their career for a minority). Nor is it suggested that the same equal opportunity or affirmative action principles should be expanded to private homeowners. It is not required that if a homeowner throws a party, he invite minorities in proportion to their percentage of the local population.
The guiding principle is that property owners — precisely by virtue of being property-owners — should have the right to discriminate on any basis they so desire, with regards to who steps on, uses, or borrows their property. No one has the right to work for — or be considered to work for — a particular company. To create such a legal entitlement is a property-rights violation, which eliminates the right of the owner to be the sole determiner of his property’s use. Likewise, no one has the right to obtain the labor of anyone else, except under the conditions they so agree to of their own free will.
The political justification for affirmative action and equal opportunity is that they are necessary, for otherwise racism and sexism would run rampant, and minorities would not be able to obtain employment, or dine in restaurants, or whatever it may be. Yet, racists and sexists operate on the level of consumers and employees as well, not just on the level of service-providers and employers. A white supremacist may surely refuse to work for an African American, or to dine in a restaurant with African-American waiters. Yet, despite this, companies with African American CEO’s and managers have no problems finding employees, nor do restaurants with African-American waiters have problems finding customers. There are also obvious economic factors that discourage irrationally discriminatory behavior in business. See, for example, No Freedom, No Peace.
