Mine too.
Oh, brudder. You two.
(sister, later, for, your, save, them, you, and)
Arrange these words in the correct order.
Lol.
Yeah, pretty funny stuff.
Askia, do you see how Liberal’s spitting on the BIA’s apology is a very handy example of what people are concerned will result from the type of us-first apology you want?
Suppose your position is that the Federal Government should offer a sincere apology for X and Y and Z.
They do so.
Voices in the A-A community take the apology the same exact way that Liberal took the BIA’s: “That sucks. Empty words. Meaningless prattle.”
The government offers to add further words, express more sentiments.
Those voices say: “Without reparations for the economic disadvantages that you’ve already acknowledged in your pathetic attempt to rid yourselves of guilt, who cares? Stuff your further words.”
Now the A-A community may be a bit closer to getting reparations (like an inch closer on a marathon course) tactically, but IMO the attitude of most white folks will continue to be “I don’t just get what I’m being asked for here–other than money, which I don’t think can ever be paid in a way that will bring this issue to rest.”
Can’t speak for Liberal but if we’re still on the OP, we’re not talking about the gov’t offering an apology. We’re talking about the gov’t compelling corporate entities to publicly acknowledge implicit or explicit ties to slavery. Everybody does the “right” thing and reparations (which nobody wants to pay) become an even more remote option.
As in, “Hey, we’re good guys. We apologized for the sins of our fathers to victims in generations past. What more can reasonably be asked of us?”
It’s a concern. It’s a legitimate concern. It’s just not a paralyzing concern. You get over yourself and make the apology as meaningful as possible by making it a damned good one – do it in a church or a relevant historic landmark, maybe get some black leaders to shape the program and the message and then endorse it. You do all that because it’s the right thing to do, not because the goal is to avoid getting sued for reparations or to please everybody. Black people are famously fickle when it comes to backing causes and hard as hell to move to anything resembling unanimous cultural action. Segregation gave us the illusion of being a monolithic community but even then, as close knit as we were with the church, schools and where we had to live, we had lots of political differences. Still do.
Again, reparations and apologies are two separate issues but I think the willingness to admit your ties to slavery would tend to lessen your being sued for reparations later. It’s not like African-Americans are en masse suing the governments of Benin and Ghana. But I don’t know what the gameplan of reparationists down to the man, so I won’t declare it’ll never happen.
And I’m suggesting, with a resolve approaching tedium, that it’s some of both. The proportion of each depends on your world view.
I realize I am coming in late in the game, and that this is going to be long winded, but…
First of all, public apologies for wrongs committed have meaning to those who attach meaning to them, but in todays’ society, the words will be drafted in such a way that while apologizing, the group making the effort will admit no wrongdoing, as to prevent the eventual litigation as response. In that way, the apologies will be hollow, even if the ‘intent’ was good. Yet if a company feels it needs to own up to the wrongs it committed, it should do so, and while that may be the noble and proper thing to do, it will cost them a lot of money, and perhaps the business, to do it.
Now, about reparations
Reperations are a damned bad idea. They were a bad idea for the Japanese, they are a bad idea for the Indians, and they are a bad idea for African Americans. All of these groups were a part of significant portions of American history. They all suffered so that lessons could be learned. The best way to pay back those you have wronged, is to make damn well certain that the wrong is never repeated.
I agree that slavery is one of those things that is so very heinous, and based on such extreme ignorance and malice, that it seems only monetary recompense is suitable. Unfortunately, the facts are that money, when improperly applied to a situation fixes nothing. Handing out checks to relatives of slaves (were there some way to show incontrovertible proof of ancestry) is the reason that parables like ‘teach a man to fish’ exist. Money cannot, and will not, make up for the history of slavery. Education and the tools to succeed however, will.
The black community is in danger from all sides. From the white power stucture, from the black power structure, from the religious power structure, and from corporate america, and lastly, but by far the most important, from inside. This is all, and I repeat ALL, because of the lack of proper education.
For instance;
Blacks are treated poorly by police because white police officers are exposed to the worst in black culture, and as humans do, they tend to generalize. There are so many white police officers because the requirements to do the job are such that many black appilcants cannot meet them. Specifically the need for college degrees. Which fewer blacks actually have, because they cannot afford to send their children to college, because they cannot get a job that pays enough to do so, because they could not afford to go to college and so on.
Then the answer must be, if you wish to create an environment that is agreeable to making reparations a reality, then ask not for checks to be written to those who can prove they were decended from slaves, but make available those funds that would be used for reparations to all African Americans. Of course, this is a logistical nightmare, but that’s hardly a stopping point. Handing out money to people is just seeding the clouds of destruction under which the black community is already suffering.
Now in a theoretical arguement, if you were to pay people, just hand out money, would not the correct thing to do be to pay those people entitled, what the going rate was for the jobs performed then? Which amounted to what, pennies an hour? Add to that interest that would have been garnered at a bank, were they able to make a deposit, and multiply it by the number of years since Honest Abe signed the emancipation proclamation, and viola! You have, roughly, a several thousand dollar check for a few thousand people who can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt they were effected by the curse of slavery.
Unless of course the reparations are strictly punitive, in which case, I’m not for it.
I am sure they were genuine. I just do not believe that feeling sorry for someone constitutes an apology. And I don’t consider myself a concerned party. My grandfather died before I was born. My mother is dead as well. No one alive suffered from the abuse or commited the abuse, and no one alive is in a position to make or accept an apology.
(bolding mine)
How can you not see that spelling out consequences is the promise of force? If I were to brandish a stick and demand money from you would no coercion exist until I hit you? The question is whether Wachovia would have acted as they did on their own. Since 150 years have passed since the acquisition of the companies, I think it is fair to say that the answer is no. As for the apology not being part of the ordinance, so what? They have had 150 years to apologize as well. In my opinion it was a PR move plain and simple. As I pointed out before, corporations are in the business of covering their asses. If such an apology satisfies you, well, more power to you. To me it would be meaningless.
Where do you see gnashing of teeth and carrying on? You have characterized holders of this position as being emotional and unstable. How do you support this other than by your simple assertion?
Here in direct response to **Liberal ** you state that Wachovia owned slaves. This is your justification.
You feel that being responsible for a thing equals owning that thing. This is absolute horseshit. Ownership and responsibility are not the same thing, no matter how you feel about it. Give one cite or mount an argument, but your feelings are poor justification for an accusation such as you have made.
… If your worldview is to be so distrustful that a mere an apology could lead to a lawsuit for reparations, thus you refuse to do so and to open yourself or your organization to any kind of admission of guilt, I can see your point even if I doubt it very much. So I’ll put it another way bluntly: despite the fears to the contrary, American minorities don’t fare well in class-action lawsuits alleging reparations. Knowing this, blacks who support reparations don’t like to sue. The risk of a lawsuit following an apology is low and successfully pulling off such a lawsuit is even lower. The PR gains of apologizing far outweigh the risks. There’s always the chance that some firms’ particular history with the peculiar institution is more litigious than others but that apparently has not been the case thus far.
Not sure who this was addressing, but my worldview is that a hot cup of coffee can cause a million dollar settlement. Something so heinous as slavery would surely be addressed with almost infinately more severity. Plus. I’m not against apologies, this is however, what I believe that the corporations involved will do and say.
Quite the opposite. An apology is good PR and when worded, timed and spun right will help avoid reparations suits. To that extent it sounds hollow to my ears but then again, I’m not the targeted audience with a lot of cultural and historic baggage wrapped up in the issue. From the mindset of a victim or survivor, we want to hear appologies from our transgressors. Even if it’s spoken by a subsequent (innocent?) generation.
Yeah, you are. But welcome.
-
You make a good point about how apologies will be of varable meaningfulness, but you know wha? You let them happen anyway if they so inclined to make a hollow apology, that’s on them.
-
Fines are a form of reparations. Compensation packages are a form of reparations. I fail to see how an organization can be held financially responsible for misbehavior and wrongdoing towards an individual, another organization, a local government or a group of its own employees but if you logically extend its responsibility it to an ethnic group it wronged its suddenly untenable. Obviously I don’t buy that time is a factor here.
-
Well— a big debate is the reparations movement is idea that reparations wouldn’t necessarily be directly monetary, and that tax breaks, education and some other training tools are some suggestions as to how it might be better spent. Much of racist attitudes are from a lack of proper education – but some people will reject “proper education” no matter what you do.
-
Punitive reparations might be quite reasonable in some cases. If the KKK were still in a position of financial strength like they were in the 20s and 30s I’d be all for punitive measures there.
QuickSilver. FINALLY. We’re in agreement.
Who is screaming for apologies by Wachovia? As far as anyone can tell by reading the article, the bank is doing this out of their own volition. It’s high time this strawman is retired.
Big deal. Some may think it is an empty gesture, but perhaps many more will not. If I stepped on your toe, should I refuse to apologize out of fear of it being perceived as empty and meaningless? Of course not. Like I said earlier, it is a far worse thing to NOT apologize because of selfish cowardice than it is to apologize and suffer the consequences.
Maybe some people will do that. So what? Reparation-seekers still have the same burden of proof with or without there being an apology, so the strength of their case remains the same.
Frankly, white people need to get over there attitudes of “me, me, me, me”. Reparations is not about them. It is not really about black people, either. If the government is being petitioned for reparations for descendants of American slaves (the large majority of whom happen to be black), it is the government’s problem. Not white people’s. Last time I checked, white people weren’t the only ones living in this country. If the government had to pay out reparations, all taxpayers would be affected. Not just the white folks. It is disingenous to paint the reparations debate in terms of black versus white, because it’s not about black versus white.
Bet you’re glad you held on to that condom now!
You’re correct. It’s right vs. wrong and reparations in this case would be… just guess… g’on… guess…
I realize that leaders who got where they are by practicing politics make all sorts of feel good statements so I don’t really think I’m naive in that respect. I just happen to view any apology about slavery as yet another feel good gesture that accomplishes nothing. Obviously many of you feel differently then I do.
QuickSilver would you care to explain to me what I’ve said that would make me disingenous?
Marc
You are not understanding me. I’m not dismissing the fact that this country is filled with post-1900 immigrants. What I am saying is that this fact has no bearing on whether a group deserves reparations and/or an apology from the government. The federal government did not immigrate here in 1900, post-Civil War. It was here from the very beginning and allowed shit to happen.
When the topic is “Should the government compensate for slavery?” it makes no sense whatsover to talk about immigrants and who’s great-grandfather arrived on what steamer ship at Ellis Island. It contributes nothing to this particular discussion. It’s like someone asking, “Should Firestone compensate for those fucked-up tires it sold?” and someone chiming in with, “I rode a bicycle to work!” People are personalizing a subject that requires no personalization.
No, I don’t know why folks have to provide a lineage and an alibi for every one of their ancestors. I’ve never met a descendant of slaves demand an apology from an individual. I have never demanded an apology from an individual about slavery. So why do so many individuals suddenly start acting defensively when it comes to slavery?
The problem with this reparations business is that people think this is a white vs. black issue. It’s not. It’s a government versus slave issue. If folks would stop seeing color and start looking at this thing rationally, then maybe a constructive dialogue–without all the alibis, excuses, and justifications–can take place.
Let’s say you became CEO of a very successful company that not only existed back in the 1800s, but also “employed” a heap of slave labor and significantly benefited from it. You discover this information shortly after you take the reigns, and you know this information is available to the public.
Why is it so bad for you, on behalf of your company’s name, to issue a statement denoucing how your company made its money? Remember, as CEO you do not represent yourself, as an individual. You represent an institution–an institutition that did some bad things in the past.
Wouldn’t a good institution apologize for the wrong it did, even if its victims are dead? Don’t people issue apologies for their sins even when their victims are dead? Isn’t this generally a good thing?
I’m not talking about innocent people or institutions. If they don’t owe an apology, they shouldn’t give one. And if they want to express sorrow, they should go ahead and do it–successful lawsuits do not hinge on expressments of sorrow. But if an institution did do something bad and refuses to apology just 'cuz they don’t want to get sued, this is cowardice. And it’s stupid. People looking to sue institutions don’t have to wait till an apology is uttered.
Maybe your argument would have more merit if you could produce evidence of a company being forced to pay reparations after issuing a formal apology. Shoot, find evidence of a company being forced to pay slave reparations period. If you aren’t able to do this, then I will conclude that your argument is based on paranoia rather than reality.
If an institution (notice my language) refuses to issue an apology and denounce their past, then people can come to multiple conclusions. One is that they do not feel sorry or regret for their past actions. This is despicable. Another is that they do feel sorry and regret but they are scared to say so. This is cowardice. It is never counter-productive to call a spade a spade. The noble thing to do would be to issue an apology and hope that it is acceptable. It is never noble to just hope people get over it.
Your basic prescription to the descendants of slaves (those of us who are angry about all this) is: “Give up fighting for what you think is right. Roll over and accept whatever empty apologies fall your way. Then be happy.” How in the hell is this noble? You are asking people to surrender a fight that has just begun.
Um, I’m hoping that “you” ain’t addressed to “me”. Because “the continued presence of an unpayable debt” is not comforting to me, and for you to say so is insulting. Again, I ask you to provide a cite backing up your claim that there is a “limitless, endless” threat of reparations. I only know of two companies that were sued for reparations–and those suits went nowhere AFAIK. I believe that companies afraid of being sued usually have cause for fear–and if they have cause for fear then their asses need to be sued. If they are blameless, they have nothing to worry about.
I haven’t rejected anyone’s apology, p.r.r. Find a poster on this thread who has said Wachovia’s “I’m sorry” is not sufficient.
Who has said this, Liberal? Who in the hell has made this argument??