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.
Money for nothing, eh? I really believe that you really don't believe it it. Just trying to be too cool for school. You are not a victim and you are not entitled to anything. You have the freedom to be as successful or as much of a loser as you choose to be; just like any other American. That's what makes this country grand.
My right to self-determination today as an American citizen has nothing to do with whether the proposal in question is justified. Sure, we all have been accorded the capacity to become successful here (at least in theory), but this present capacity does nothing to address the historical reality of injustice that has affected generations of Americans in very real and tangible ways. You have to consider the goal and scope of reparations: to economically redress the institutional wrongs (starting with slavery, culminating into sanctioned discrimination) that have prevented the African-American population from collectively accumulating the necessary wealth over the generations to be reasonably competitive in society with those groups who have not experienced those wrongs.
My sense is that most who object to black reparations do so on the basis of whether the distant descendants of the enslaved (people like myself) are just as entitled to reparations as the former enslaved themselves.
I'll grant you for the sake of argument that they are not. Since there are obviously no former slaves living today, the only person I can think of that would qualify for reparations would be 114 yr old Gertrude Baines , the oldest living person in the world, daughter of former slaves. Though born a free woman, I think you would agree that if any black person were justified in receiving reparations directly today it would be Ms. Baines. But since Ms. Baines has no living descendants of her own, whatever amount of money the government decided to increase her estate by would essentially return to the government in one form or another with her passing, provided of course she had no provisions outlined in a living will. Thus the reparations provided to Ms. Baines would be essentially meaningless, accomplishing nothing with regards to the loss of wealth the black community as an aggregate suffered through generations of economic injustice.
Now of course if Momma Baines were awarded a relatively large sum of reparation money (millions), one can only imagine the sea of legality that will engulf her if, say, she decided to apportion the majority of her estate to every black family in America.
So the question becomes, if the idea of reparations to individuals of direct descent is justified but clearly infeasible (given the goal of reparations in the fist place), what prevents the idea of reparations for collective descent from being equally justifiable?
Big difference between years later and centuries later.
As for reconstruction, that was then and this is now?
just guessin'
Maybe I'm going too fast for you. Let me help you out a bit. If reparations weren't good for blacks during Reconstruction, immediately after slavery, then why were they good for the Japanese in 1988, 40 years after internment?
So why the absence? If it was good for all the other oppressed groups years later, why wasn't it good for the main oppressed group during Reconstruction?
Let's go back and give reparations to everyone that has been oppressed, victimized or otherwise harmed. Including slaves of African-American decent we can also start with the virtual slaves of European decent both adults and children that worked the coal mines in Pennsylvania.
I'm not trying to directly compare the situation slaves faced with "freedom" being the largest consideration however that is a relative term in this comparison and there are quite a few parallels. Technically these people were not slaves because they could go elsewhere if they wanted however in reality that is exactly what they were because it was either work or die hence the reason you would have children as young as the ones depicted in this picture working in the mines.
Here's how it worked, the mining company would own everything including the land, housing, stores and whatever else you might have. Sound familiar? The miners were paid just enough so they could make ends meet. Rent, food and other necessities were closely calculated so they could never get ahead and in lot of cases fell behind basically indenturing them to the mine.
My point is this, these people were obviously exploited as were many others groups of people of all races, do they deserve reparations too?
My Irish ancestors were portrayed as dirty, drunken, violent, ape-like louts and it was all too common to put up signs at workplaces saying "Irish Need Not Apply".
Maybe I'm going too fast for you. Let me help you out a bit. If reparations weren't good for blacks during Reconstruction, immediately after slavery, then why were they good for the Japanese in 1988, 40 years after internment?
Would have been nice if the actual slaves would have been given something in 1905 from the actual slave owners. Totally agree. Anyways, my ancestors were in Europe. What do you want from me?
American taxpayers don't seem have a problem with giving their tax money to Iraq, Afgahanistan, Pakistan, Egypt and Israel; therefore, U.S. taxpayers shouldn't gripe about giving reparations to their own citizens.
I have big problems with giving money to foreign countries, and I have problems with this bill as well.
if anyone takes this money, then they should also lose their citizenship.
the only people that should get any of this money is people that were once slaves that are still alive, no other.
also, if this money is given out, then the 14th Amendment should also be repealed.
American taxpayers don't seem have a problem with giving their tax money to Iraq, Afgahanistan, Pakistan, Egypt and Israel; therefore, U.S. taxpayers shouldn't gripe about giving reparations to their own citizens.
Actually many of us gripe about the above. That said those who were wronged by slavery and those who did it are long dead.
Your great great grandfather punched my great great grandfather for no reason. I want reparations for pain and suffering. Makes just about as much sense.
Obama has said before that he doesn't support the idea of reparations.
He also said that he would never sign spending bills with earmarks or appoint lobbhists to his regime.
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.
