It’s not an artificial barrier. It’s a recognition on how people act in the real world.
What I’m saying is that you have to make a choice. Which do you want to see happen: reparations for past wrongs or the elimination of future wrongs? Because the effort you spend bringing the first closer will push the second farther away. I feel the elimination of future wrongs is the more important fight so reparations needs to step aside until that fight is won.
Nm
This exactly, taking care of the present and future is far more important than risk setting it back further.
Not an opinion on reparations, but while they will not have won the lottery, if you don’t have reliable transportation, a path to homeownership or a way to pay for college, that’s literally life-changing money. That’s exactly the sort of thing that moves people from poverty to the middle class.
Of course its punishment for past wrongs. But it punishes not the victimizors nor even their descendants, but those of us who have no contact with the wrongdoing. The notion of collective guilt is odious and the history of the 20th Century out to have tought you as much. We already have in place remedies for those who have been injured. We have as a society tried to remedy past wrongs. An opportunity to get paid will not do anything to change the past and will unfairly punish millions of people living right now.
I haven’t suggested it’s “neat”, just that it’s achievable. At the very least it’s reasonable to discuss it. I think your rote dismissal is unreasonable.
It’s certainly reasonable to consider. All I’m suggesting is that reparations (or whatever you’d call compensation for damages from policies like redlining) really are a reasonable thing to discuss and investigate, and not a wackadoodle nutty idea that can be dismissed out of hand.
I’m sure you’d agree that reparations were reasonable in 1865. How about 1870? 1900? 1930? 1960? At what point, if you don’t think it’s at all reasonable in the present, did the idea go from reasonable to totally unreasonable?
These would all be reasonable questions and reasonable challenges. There could be several possible approaches – estimate the wealth difference between white and black households and stop there (no need to even go into details like redlining in this instance); estimate the damages from specific policies for the “average” black family or individual; go into much more detail, region by region, city by city, or neighborhood by neighborhood, and estimate the average financial damages to each individual within that region/city/neighborhood based on various policies; go into maximal detail and try to estimate how much each individual was harmed based on their individual circumstances.
That last option is probably far too massive of an undertaking to reasonably accomplish; the first option is perhaps too broad with no consideration for different circumstances; so I’d tend to favor some option in the middle, perhaps a combination of the various approaches.
But we don’t have to pick one now. All I’m saying is that this is a reasonable thing to suggest that we consider.
You probably won’t be surprised to see that I strongly disagree – I think the lack of reasonable discussion on reparations for actual wrongdoing that has affected living people has significantly harmed the chances to eliminate future wrongs. I think ignoring this possibility of compensating for real damages makes the likelihood of a truly fair and just society more remote, not less remote.
If i were a recent Latino or Asian immigrant, I wouldnt find it so reasonable.
So you opposed reparations for those Japanese Americans who were interred? You opposed reparations from Germany towards Holocaust victims? Otherwise, I don’t understand your point at all.
This is contrary to the views of most of the recent immigrants that I’ve spoken to. I imagine the idea of a truly just nation, accepting responsibility for and paying damages for past wrongdoing (like the internment of Japanese Americans) is quite appealing to many patriotic immigrants.
Collective punishment based on race seems racist.
Agreed. Thankfully, reparations wouldn’t be about punishment based on race, and I’d oppose any reparations scheme that was setup to be collective punishment based on race.
I’ll state my argument in a slightly different way, more as Ta-Nehisi Coates does in this great article (linked here again): The Case for Reparations by Ta-Nehisi Coates - The Atlantic
For most of American history, including well into the living memory of millions of Americans, America has plundered the bodies, labor, and property of black Americans. America as a whole has grown more wealthy due to this plunder, but black people have, for the most part, not benefited from this plunder. It seems reasonable to me that we, as a country, should consider at least the possibility of exploring the ramifications of these decades and centuries of plunder, and explore ways to possibly try and make up for this plunder, for those living Americans who have personally suffered from these practices and policies that were part of the plunder, if not also the descendants of its past victims.
Are you going to conflate The Holocaust with redlining? Really?
Also, reperations were paid to actual victims. Not their kin. Red lining victims also have recourse through the court system. Its morally wrong to steal from people who had nothing to do with these vile and racist practices.
I’ll certainly conflate the Holocaust with the overall historical treatment – decades and centuries of mass brutality, rape, and murder – of black people in America. Some smaller facet like redlining might more reasonably be compared to various instances within Nazi territory in which Jews had property taken, or were confined to ghettos, or similar practices.
I agree that theft is morally wrong. I don’t consider taxation theft, though. I’ve specifically suggested reparations be targeted, at least at the start, to individuals who personally suffered from unjust policies and practices.
I’ve asked you three times so far about reparations for Japanese-American internment, and you’ve ignored me. Here I’ll go again: Do you think they were wrong? Was it theft? Was it unjust? Did it constitute punishment of those who had nothing to do with it?
Accepting respinsibilty, apologizing and changibg the law? Yes.
Stealing from the innocent? No.
Or, you could start a foundation where lime minded folks could contribute.
Again, were reparations for internment of Japanese Americans “stealing from the innocent”? Yes or no?
Your point is silly. Find some black folk who were thrown in concentration camps and had their property stolen. Then lets talk reparations. A 20 something black person is no more deserving of reparations then a 20 something sansei.
Well done slaying that straw man. Let me know when you’ve read my actual posts about who I’ve suggested reparations should be targeted towards.
Again, were reparations for internment of Japanese Americans “stealing from the innocent”? Yes or no?
Since they were actual victims of government malfeasance, no. And only actual victims were paid.
How bout saying what you believe should happen.