mswas, your rant is short sighted to say the least. There were numerous southern states in the 1960’s that had signs up that said “white only”. Without the civil right movement, those signs would probably still be up. Churches were bombed, people were lynched, and the police were down with this. Black people couldn’t even dream of having the kind of opportunity or making the kind of money a white man could, and this is still largely true today. They passed the voting rights act, what, in 1965, 37 years ago? 150 years ago? Are you sleeping in a time machine? You still have racism and segragation today as Grendel pointed out. So, you’re angry about this? FUCK YOU! Get a mother fucking grip! You don’t know shit about the history of this country as it relates to black people.
On behalf of the Dutch, allow me to apologise. That whole slave trading thing seemed like such a good idea at the time, you know?
[sub]Uh-oh. Does this mean a million African Americans will be marching in The Hague tomorrow?[/sub]
EasyPhil, I don’t think anyone is claiming racism is a thing of the past - what they’re asking is how reparations are helping this issue.
How would you say slavery reparations end racism?
Exactly, right, Coldy. If reparations are granted (and Goddess forbid that they are), it will do nothing to end racism in the US. No one here is saying that slavery was a good thing, but reparations will only breed discontent among the poor in the US as many non-African-Americans would be resentful of the sudden windfall that African-Americans would recieve were reparations to be granted.
If reparations were ever paid, the Aryan Pigfucks would have a goddamned field day. Allow me to expound:
Around here, there are two main races: Amerinds and Whites. Amerinds tend to live on reservations, of which there are many in Montana, including one close by called Rocky Boy. Reservations are, in some ways, half-sovereign: They have their own tribal governance and law enforcement, and jurisdiction in some criminal cases can get tangled what with the BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Federal group that directly manages reservations) and all. So there is a certain amount of social and cultural disconnect between Whites and Amerinds, which naturally leads to myths.
One of the most insidious myths is ‘Indian Money’: Certain Whites think that all Amerinds get a certain amount of money upon turning eighteen from the Federal government. This is completely fallacious, but as reservation life is something of a mystery to Whites in general the myth has gained a certain currency among local racists. This leads to feelings of envy and indignation, feeding into the feeling that certain groups are unfairly favored by the Federal government at the expense of White taxpayers. The fact that these people are angry about absolutely nothing real has kept those feelings from welling up in a real way.
Imagine if something like ‘Indian Money’ ever came to pass.
‘Nigger Money,’ as the reparations would be called, would foment racial tension the likes of which I have no desire to see repeated in this nation. Words like ‘entitlement’ and ‘favoritism’ and ‘victim status’ would be thrown around by pigfucks determined to keep the races seperate. Race-baiters would gain a huge fucking steak to bait both sides of the issue. Jesse Jackson and David Duke might actually fucking kill each other.
A very bad scene.
Maybe a check cut to all whites and all blacks who are racists fuckheads just to shut them up would be a good idea? This would only have one catch, if they are caught blatting one syllable about the other race or how they didn’t get enough, they get a public flogging cap off the event.
Of course I am being facetious.
Certain whites say this, certain blacks say that. Who gives a fuck what they say? Ignorance isn’t supposed to be profitable, whether it is someone believing native americans get huge checks at age 18 or asserting someone has no inclination of American history to justify reparations.
Reparations are nothing more than a divisive tactic to cash in, it wont solve anything.
I fail to see how this would be a bad thing…
I, for one, would like to know when the Eqyptians are going to be issuing reparations to the Jews. Those are LONG overdue.
Maybe we should just implement a victim-based economy. Once a person is born, a genetic test is made to determine what groups of people were in his or her ancestry that were victimized, and what ancestral groups were doing the victimizing.
If you are lucky enough to have more victims than victimizers in your past, you get a check. If there’s more victimizers, you get a bill.
That will cure all racism in the world, in a single generation! No one will ever resent having to pay a bill to a stranger for something their great-great-grandfather did to that person’s great-great-grandfather. It’s the right thing to do! All past wounds back to the dawn of recorded history will be healed, and all races will walk together hand in hand, in pretty flowery fields with bunnies and rainbows.
Fuck, man. Now you’ve invoked dec3mber[sup]1[/sup], who will hijack this thread to rant about the anti-semitic Egyptians.
[sup]1[/sup] = misspelled in case he does vanity searches
Maybe you should keep your feet and mail me the check. 
I agree with the OP. But for the record: lets assume for the sake of argument that reparations ARE justified and that we agree as a nation to pay them. In such a case, I would have no problem with asking recent immigrants to share the burden. If they’re going to come here to partake of the benefits of being in this country, then why shouldn’t they partake also of the burden?
I want my cut! Do I get extra for my Blackfoot great-grandfather? Surely American Indians should start some sort of million indian march on Washington— interest on that 24$ should be worth a pretty penny by now. And how about all those Japanese Americans whose families lost everything during WWII? They should join in too.
The US should stop fucking with people-- it could end up costing far too much.
It’s amazing how much of a bad idea this is. And then the implementation issues. Would we need race-based testing? Notarized family trees with documentation?
Yikes, and now a reparations march.
I guess it’s a bad idea whose time has come.
Well I won’t tell Michael Eric Dyson columnist for the Chicago Sun-Timeswhat you said.
I mean if calling Jesse Lee Peterson, founder of the Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny, a
then I could just imagine how he labels you.
I still get a smile out of the way the pro-rep crowd tried to shout down & mute David Horowitz (a former Panther) with his “Ten Reasons why Reparations for Slavery is a Bad Idea — And Racist, Too”
[quote]
[ol][li]There Is No Single Group Responsible For the Crime of Slavery[]There Is No One Group That Benefitted Exclusively From Its Fruits[]Only a Tiny Minority of White Americans Ever Owned Slaves, And Others Gave Their Lives To Free Them[]America Is A Multi-Ethnic Nation And Most Americans Have No Connections (Direct or Indirect) To Slavery[]The Historical Precedents Used To Justify The Reparations Claim Do Not Apply, And The Claim Itself Is Based On Race Not Injury[]The Reparations Argument Is Based On The Unfounded Claim That All African-American Descendants of Slaves Suffer From The Economic Consequences Of Slavery And Discrimination[]The Reparations Claim Is One More Attempt To Turn African-Americans Into Victims. It Sends A Damaging Message To The African-American Community[]Reparations To African-Americans Have Already Been Paid[]What About The Debt Blacks Owe To America?The Reparations Claim Is A Separatist Idea That Sets African-Americans Against The Nation That Gave Them Freedom[/ol][/li][/quote]
Now, most people would agree with at least two of those reasons, some as many as 8 or 9.
OJ’s guilt perception, Part 2:
[snip] A USA Today poll shows whites and blacks to be sharply divided on the issue. 90% of whites polled said the government should not make cash payments, 6% support payments. Among blacks, 55 percent said the government should pay.[/snip]
Q: How about justice for slaves being held in bodage in (Muslim)
North Africa today?
This is a red herring; it’s not a question of modern individuals owing reparation. It’s a question of whether the United States government, a continuous entity, owes reparations. I don’t think it does; it’s a government that was founded on principles of freedom and equal rights, which it’s gradually, slowly, step by step been trying to live up to ever since. It fought a war that ended slavery, banned it constitutionally, and has (taking two steps forward and one step back) been working towards civil rights ever since. (Right now John Ashcroft is trying to take us several steps back in that area, but that’s another subject.)
If the U.S. government hasn’t established its anti-slavery credentials by now, there’s no hope.
Also, how could money ever actually be a reparation for that?
What the government does owe is true concern for people now. Our social programs are half-assed. Let’s spend the money and take the steps necessary to let every child start with good pre-natal care, go to a really good school, and be able to go to college.
Concerning the question of holding the U.S. government responsible for allowing slavery to exist within it’s borders, you have to ask yourself the following questions:
-
“Wrongful birth” lawsuits are in vouge nowadays. Should women who wanted an abortion before Roe v. Wade be allowed to sue the government for forcing them to bear children that were clearly unwanted at the time?
-
Until fairly recently, there were no laws in place preventing job or housing discrimination on the basis of religion (and race too). Should I be able to sue the government on the basis of the fact that the government allowed my great-grandfather to be discriminated against in the job market?
-
Should women be allowed to sue the federal government because their civil rights were denied by being barred from voting until 1920?
I think a distinction needs to be made between an institution that predated the country’s existence (and was allowed to exist in the country by default) and a policy the U.S. government put into place. In the first category, we could put slavery. The U.S. government didn’t create slavery in it’s borders, it existed from the time the land belonged to the British, Spanish and French. It was simply not outlawed until the passage of the thirteenth amendment. An example of the latter institution is the displacement of Japanese-Americans into camps during World War II. That is an institution that was wholly the invention of the U.S. government, and, as such, the U.S. government should be responsible for it.
Holding the government responsible for the first type of institution, however, leaves it open to all sorts of lawsuits in the future when new civil rights are granted.
Zev Steinhardt
The only divisive bullshit in this scenario is that fucking idiotic letter you wrote, mswas. “Ending slavery is OK, getting civil rights is OK, but demanding money is right out 'cos a demand for money automatically means a demand for my money. Go out and earn your own, you lazy bastards.” :rolleyes:
First off, genius boy, where in that article does it say these organizations are demanding reparations from the US government? It doesn’t because they aren’t. The lawsuit over reparations is targeting companies, like Aetna, that made money off the slave trade by issuing insurance policies against runaway slaves and the death of slaves, if not actually financing the trade itself. That wealth is still there, in the coffers of those businesses. So if you’d actually taken the time to find out a little more about the reparations fight, you’d have understood that 1) Blacks aren’t looking for another “government handout” and 2) there’s absolutely no attitude in these organizations that “all whites owe us money for slavery”.
Secondly, they’re not saying this is a Blacks-only effort. There doesn’t seem to be any negative reaction among New York Blacks that 22 percent of white also support reparations. And I, for one, definitely plan on being there on the 17th when that rally comes together. This is a fight for economic and social justice like any one of a number of struggles around the country and around the world. The connections are there to be made.
Finally, the ignorance of US history you display is completely astounding. Industrialization only made the North rich; the South’s economy was almost entirely dependent on agriculture. And how in the living fuck do you think those slaveowners got rich enough to afford plantations in the first place? Slave labor. Money’s a lot easier to make when you don’t have to pay the people who work for you.
In short, the only racist attitudes being spouted here are yours. You’re saying Blacks aren’t entitled to demand economic justice at all because you personally weren’t responsible for slavery. No person alive today is, but the conclusion that Blacks have to like it or lump it doesn’t follow.
**
Actually, Olentzero, I’m afraid you may be wrong on this. Randall Simon, the author of The Debt, has talked about the government paying reparations. In addition, H.R.40, introduced in the House, specifically lists among it’s purposes (bolding mine)
and under it’s duties it lists
**
As such it’s clear that they are looking to the Federal and State governments for possible reparations. It is true that the present lawsuit is only filed against private companies, but that, of course, can change at any moment.
In addition, at least some of the companies named in the suit did not deal with slaves, but ended up buying companies that insured slaves. Can you buy guilt? Surely the modern-day investors in these companies aren’t responsible, are they?
Zev Steinhardt
Well, let’s see:
I’m from South-Western Germany, so the Prussians owe me for Alsace-Lorraine
I’m Irish Catholic, so Lilibet owes me big time
I’m Polish/Hungarian-Austria better pay up!!!
And um, I’m a woman, so all men have to pay me because my fellow women weren’t allowed to vote until 1920!
Oh, and my head hurts-can I get some Krispy Kremes?