Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A complete misreading of my argument. I'm not sympathetic to the South for their economic devastation. I am pointing out that the South paid a very heavy price for clinging to slavery in the first place. And the economic devastation to the South as a result of the Civil War, however unfairly, did a great deal to fuel the civil rights abuses that followed.
As far as the rest of your argument, anecdotes are not a good enough rationale. For the apportionment of reparations would be an unbelievably complex arrangement, one that would require research and arbitration down to almost the molecular level. I mean, does a hardscrabble white family in backwoods Georgia that has been poor for generations pay money into a fund where an African-American professional family in Boston gets compensated for what occurred 150 years ago? Does an African-American family that immigrated here from Barbados or Jamaica in the past two decades get compensated the same as an African-American family that can trace its ancestry back to 1600s Virginia? What about an African-American family that can trace its ancestry to ancestors who owned slaves themselves? After all, African-American slaveowners in Louisiana formed a militia composed of 1,000 men that fought for the Confederacy. In fact, this unit was the first one on either side of the conflict to have African-American officers. Are the descendants of those men entitled to the same amount of reparations as the descendants of those who fought for the Union?
In other words, this can descend into chaos very quickly. The notion of reparation is one of those notions that might seem okay in theory but gets quickly bogged down in a flood tide of details. It is impractical and would never work.
I did not bring "anecdotes" up for "rationale." I stated the truth in that the HB that is brought before our Congress every year since the late 1980s is about a "Study for Reparations" and not reparations themselves.
And I could easily create a policy/procedure for eligibility of access to reparations programs of which I described (which are medical and education based only).
IMO black families would need to substantiate their ancestry in America to the 1870 census or via vital records/state documents or old church documents of that era or before to be able to obtain eligibility for reparations programs. Also, they would need to have at leas 1/4 of their ancestors be verified by this means as being a black/colored American for these programs.
Contrary to what people think, that is not hard. I do genealogical trees primarily for black Americans and every one of them I can trace to the 1870 census, which was the first that included former slaves.
On the Louisiana Creoles - yes they should be compensated. Many of their descendants were victims of institutionalized racism post Civil War. Also, recent black immigrants from Africa/Carribbean would be excluded based on information above unless one of their parents was a black American.
And the "poor white family" thing has nothing to do with it IMO. All Americans, including those poor whites in the south and poor white immigrants who came to the US benefited from the racial discrimination that was enacted against black Americans from 1868 to 1980. They got jobs when blacks could not even though blacks spoke the language and most in the north especially were more educated and "qualified" than the white immigrants there are many documented cases of this in the community I am from in Ohio, I can go way beyond "anecdotes." Many companies would NOT hire black people to work in any position other than a low level laborer or janitor and this has been documented in various communities. White immigrants from Poland or Ireland in my area, even the Polish ones who couldn't speak English could be supervisors over my black ancestors who lived in this area over 100 years and who were highly educated. It is documented and verified that Redlining occurred across our entire country and it prevented black people from being able to gain wealth economically via home ownership. It is documented and verified that black children were denied a quality education post Civil War.
I can be understanding of the economic plight of poor whites. It is odd to me that you and others are not as understanding about the stifling economic plight of highly educated, capable black Americans who were not provided with equal opportunities to pursue the "American Dream" until my lifetime, and I'm not that old. Or to think that a "study" on reparations is something to even bring up poor white southerners or appalachains.
As stated, I like most black Americans are WELL aware of the fact that reparations will NEVER happen. But it is interesting to me that people don't even want the study to occur to prove how far black Americans have come despite the stifling oppression of our government towards the demographic.
Last edited by residinghere2007; 12-01-2016 at 10:04 AM..
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,470,414 times
Reputation: 12187
I think it's interesting that you only hear about reparations for slavery but never reparations for the tremendous damage done by urban renewal. Many thriving Black urban neighborhoods with Black owned small businesses were obliterated from the 1950s to 1970s and most have not recovered. Unlike slavery that event is within living memory. Bottom line is the media is based in NYC and LA and still wants to blame all race problems on White Southerners and they know urban renewal was perpetrated by rich Northern Whites who controlled govt.
The other problem with slave repartitions is many people are of mixed White / Black heritage, especially in the South and Appalachia. What about a "White person" who is 2% Black and that 2% were once slaves? I have ancestors who owned slaves and ancestors who fought and died for the Union cause, meanwhile some White Americans just got here in 1995. Would someone whose ancestors owned slaves and only fought for the Confederacy have to pay more than other people? I think reparations takes away focus from removing any remaining injustices.
This completely falls of the deaf ears of EVERY American judge that hears one of these claims. However, there is really nothing stopping Morocco (America's oldest ally) from filing a claim that black Americans were citizens of the Moroccan Empire that were unlawfully and involuntary kidnapped from their peripheral territory:
The onus would then be on black Americans to successfully trace their ancestry to one of these areas of the present-day Niger River Valley which would not include ALL African Americans and still would not be an easy task due the paucity of personal identity records that were kept on slaves.
Regardless of afrocentric, nubian olmec delusions; the vast majority of the trans-Atlantic came from the coastal region of Cacheu River to Angola, south of the Sawahil EL Sudan & well south of Maghrib al Aqsa.
The current nation-states now in existence in that region were not in existence then.
I've always argued that reparations needs to be approached from a Jim Crow/segregation standpoint, due to the fact that there are 'direct victims', or next of kin of direct victims, who are still alive.....
1. Families of lynching victims
2. Tuskegee/Johns Hopkins Experiments
3. Folk who were DOA en route to a black hospital 20 miles away, even though the white one that refused care was right there!
4. Proof of housing policies that steered people to the PJ's or to the "South side"! (Chicago may know a thing os two about that! Shoot, any urban spot for that matter!)
5. Folk who got their ***** beat bused to school in a different neighborhood in the 60s, 70s, 80s....!
I think it's interesting that you only hear about reparations for slavery but never reparations for the tremendous damage done by urban renewal. Many thriving Black urban neighborhoods with Black owned small businesses were obliterated from the 1950s to 1970s and most have not recovered. Unlike slavery that event is within living memory. Bottom line is the media is based in NYC and LA and still wants to blame all race problems on White Southerners and they know urban renewal was perpetrated by rich Northern Whites who controlled govt.
The other problem with slave repartitions is many people are of mixed White / Black heritage, especially in the South and Appalachia. What about a "White person" who is 2% Black and that 2% were once slaves? I have ancestors who owned slaves and ancestors who fought and died for the Union cause, meanwhile some White Americans just got here in 1995. Would someone whose ancestors owned slaves and only fought for the Confederacy have to pay more than other people? I think reparations takes away focus from removing any remaining injustices.
Just wanted to note that urban renewal programs happened all over the country - north, south, east, and west.
All politicians had a hand in those areas in implementing the programs that destroyed primarily black and immigrant neighborhoods. It was not just a northern phenomenon. I am from Ohio, but have lived in Michigan and in Georgia. I worked in housing for many years, it is a huge interest of mine - the history of housing programs and urban renewal in particular (it is a FASCINATING subject).
I lived for a long time in Atlanta, GA which had a lot of urban renewal programs that destroyed black neighborhoods and commercial districts. However, the end of legalized segregation had more to do with the economic disintegration of black neighborhoods in Atlanta, Detroit, and the larger cities in Ohio. Once black people were allowed to leave old, dilapidated neighborhoods, they left and due to many of those people being the professional black middle class, the neighborhoods suffered. However, prior to the legalization occurring, there were many projects undertaken in the 1940s-1970s that bulldozed black neighborhoods. If you research the federal highway system and the routes they took through various large urban areas, the neighborhoods that were destroyed for those roads were primarily poor black neighborhood or poor white immigrant communities (or Jews).
I am from NW Ohio and ironically many black people here supported the public housing movement because of the dilapidated houses they were living in. Unfortunately, with the creation of public housing, came to our area, the tradition of racial segregation. There were no defined "negro" or "white" areas here until public housing came into the mix. The first public housing locations were for "negros." The neighborhood had initially been a mixed neighborhood of blacks and predominantly Irish, Germans, and Jews. The Irish, Germans, and Jews were forced to relocate to other neighborhoods and only the blacks were allowed to live in the new public housing. Later the housing authority built "white" developments for the Irish who complained and the Polish who were viewed as more lowly than the Irish. This solidified segregation in the city which lasts until this day. Public housing also was initially for in tact, working class families. Poor individuals sued to inclusion and this lead to the poor quality of public housing communities and them being dominated by poverty stricken families. This is what caused the black ghetto in many urban areas.
On your reparations comments, see my comments made above. Reparations should not be solely about slavery. Slavery was not as damaging to black people in the modern era as racist government who overlooked blacks being terrorized and who legislated oppression against black Americans post Civil War. And again, the white immigrants who came benefitted from the discrimination against black Americans, especially in large urban centers. If they came in 1895 they had more opportunities as new Americans versus black Americans who had 200+ years of ancestry in this country.
I've always argued that reparations needs to be approached from a Jim Crow/segregation standpoint, due to the fact that there are 'direct victims', or next of kin of direct victims, who are still alive.....
1. Families of lynching victims
2. Tuskegee/Johns Hopkins Experiments
3. Folk who were DOA en route to a black hospital 20 miles away, even though the white one that refused care was right there!
4. Proof of housing policies that steered people to the PJ's or to the "South side"! (Chicago may know a thing os two about that! Shoot, any urban spot for that matter!)
5. Folk who got their ***** beat bused to school in a different neighborhood in the 60s, 70s, 80s....!
1, 2 and 3 puts the South on the hook!
4 and 5 puts the North on the hook!
On these, will note that many families of lynching victims lived in the north - see Emmett Till who was born in Chicago.
Medical experimentation on black people and lack of care at segregated hospitals was also a tradition in the north for your 2-3. People are just more aware of the Tuskegee experiment and John Hopkins. This happened all over the US. There were also sterilization programs all over the US that targeted poor blacks and other "less desirable" populations whereas women were sterilized without their knowledge.
On your #4 this also happened in the south. The south just already had more legalized segregation policies versus many northern and west coast areas. However, when public housing was created, the south and all other regions of the country did the same things.
For #5 I personally believe that kids will always find a reason to beat some body up if they want to. I am more concerned in regards to bussing that it made black intellectualism less normalized for black children. Bussing and forced integration is what caused the term "acting white" to come about. Prior to that occurring being intelligent was not looked upon as being a "white" thing by a large amount of black students. Also that it put black children in classes with teachers who had racial biases against black children and their ability to learn.
Just wanted to note that urban renewal programs happened all over the country - north, south, east, and west.
All politicians had a hand in those areas in implementing the programs that destroyed primarily black and immigrant neighborhoods. It was not just a northern phenomenon. I am from Ohio, but have lived in Michigan and in Georgia. I worked in housing for many years, it is a huge interest of mine - the history of housing programs and urban renewal in particular (it is a FASCINATING subject).
I lived for a long time in Atlanta, GA which had a lot of urban renewal programs that destroyed black neighborhoods and commercial districts. However, the end of legalized segregation had more to do with the economic disintegration of black neighborhoods in Atlanta, Detroit, and the larger cities in Ohio. Once black people were allowed to leave old, dilapidated neighborhoods, they left and due to many of those people being the professional black middle class, the neighborhoods suffered. However, prior to the legalization occurring, there were many projects undertaken in the 1940s-1970s that bulldozed black neighborhoods. If you research the federal highway system and the routes they took through various large urban areas, the neighborhoods that were destroyed for those roads were primarily poor black neighborhood or poor white immigrant communities (or Jews).
I am from NW Ohio and ironically many black people here supported the public housing movement because of the dilapidated houses they were living in. Unfortunately, with the creation of public housing, came to our area, the tradition of racial segregation. There were no defined "negro" or "white" areas here until public housing came into the mix. The first public housing locations were for "negros." The neighborhood had initially been a mixed neighborhood of blacks and predominantly Irish, Germans, and Jews. The Irish, Germans, and Jews were forced to relocate to other neighborhoods and only the blacks were allowed to live in the new public housing. Later the housing authority built "white" developments for the Irish who complained and the Polish who were viewed as more lowly than the Irish. This solidified segregation in the city which lasts until this day. Public housing also was initially for in tact, working class families. Poor individuals sued to inclusion and this lead to the poor quality of public housing communities and them being dominated by poverty stricken families. This is what caused the black ghetto in many urban areas.
On your reparations comments, see my comments made above. Reparations should not be solely about slavery. Slavery was not as damaging to black people in the modern era as racist government who overlooked blacks being terrorized and who legislated oppression against black Americans post Civil War. And again, the white immigrants who came benefitted from the discrimination against black Americans, especially in large urban centers. If they came in 1895 they had more opportunities as new Americans versus black Americans who had 200+ years of ancestry in this country.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge and experience in this area. This is turning into quite an informative thread.
I remember reading a long time ago, about when the practice of redlining began. IDK if it began in NYC, or if that was used as a prime example. But the article did say that once upon a time, immigrants (Germans, Poles, Jews from around Europe) and Blacks lived together in mixed neighborhoods, and got along fine with each other. Friendly, neighborly, no issues. All just regular folks. Then it was decided by the city Powers That Be to corral Blacks in the inner city (i.e. their existing neighborhoods), while "developing" the fringe for an expanding population.
So housing was built along an outer tier for the Germans, Poles and Jews, who were happy with the new buildings, a step or two up from where they'd been, needless to say. And then beyond that tier, the "real" middle-class and upper-middle class housing was built. There was probably more to the story; this is all I remember.
I can't help thinking in retrospect; when the Euro immigrant families saw the units that had been built for them, I'm sure they thought it was wonderful, but did it cross their minds to wonder about the people they'd left behind, and what was really going on? Did they wonder why none of their Black neighbors were joining them in the new housing? It would make a good research project, possibly, if the people who benefited from that process could be tracked down and interviewed.
On another note, I'm from the SF Bay Area. I learned that in the 60's, the neighborhood called the Western Addition, a mainly Black neighborhood, was slated for "renovation" (otherwise called: "slum clearance" in the parlance of the day). This was a neighborhood full of historic Victorian architecture, the kind that is prized in SF today. In fact, a row of houses that survived the process there, facing a park, is often photographed for postcards and photo-album coffee table books on SF, as portraying the "real" historic SF. Such painful irony. Such a loss to the city, as well as to the families who lived there! And one wonders--were the families compensated fairly, if at all, for their loss? Where did they go? (I've heard that some relocated to a neighborhood nearby, and probably some moved to Oakland.)
Are you a writer, r-h2007? Lots of potential within your topic for compelling stories on history themes. It would make a good book. Could even end up selected as a textbook in relevant university classes.
Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 12-02-2016 at 02:16 PM..
When and if it happens............is monetary pay enough? Is a one-time monetary payment enough or will this endeavor be dragged out and taken advantage of? Why do we think money will help repair what has happened anyway? Simply acknowledging that slavery and all that happened during that time period was wrong isn't enough either. I don't think money will help anything. Something has to give.
Will talking about the past help us all to finally mentally move on from the past? To me, it just keep us all going in a circle that refuses to be broken. :/
While discussing "reparations", I would like to talk to some Western Native American tribes about my Grandfather's brother. He went West as a young man, and was never heard from again. It is believed that he was killed by Indians.
It that is true, they stole my Great Uncle from me, and I want paid for that! No, I can not prove who killed him, but they can't prove they didn't, either!
I've always argued that reparations needs to be approached from a Jim Crow/segregation standpoint, due to the fact that there are 'direct victims', or next of kin of direct victims, who are still alive.....
1. Families of lynching victims
2. Tuskegee/Johns Hopkins Experiments
3. Folk who were DOA en route to a black hospital 20 miles away, even though the white one that refused care was right there!
4. Proof of housing policies that steered people to the PJ's or to the "South side"! (Chicago may know a thing os two about that! Shoot, any urban spot for that matter!)
5. Folk who got their ***** beat bused to school in a different neighborhood in the 60s, 70s, 80s....!
1, 2 and 3 puts the South on the hook!
4 and 5 puts the North on the hook!
Regarding #5, I was jumped several times and had the crap kicked out of me by black kids just for being white at a black school. Can that count towards my reparation duty? Also I also got my ass kicked by Italian-American kids for not being Italian or even Catholic. Can I get something for that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It would make a good book. Could even end up selected as a textbook in relevant university classes.
