In the case of Jim Crow, that may very well be the case. No one has presented a cite that shows statutes of limitations being applied to claims of civil rights violations, though.
But I doubt that the statute of limitations is the primary reason why this debate has continued for so long (on this board and elsewhere). A person could take Sampiro’s position in 1958 (or 1968…or 1978) as easily as he could take it today.
As in a bill authorizing blanket reparations to Jim Crow victims, without proof of harm? It’s not impossible. The interned Japanese received reparations through this option. The only reason why it would be a political nonstarter is that people are simply sick of black people “whining”…even when the “whining” is completely justified.
I don’t think anyone has a right to compensation. They have a right to be heard fair and square. After being given a fair shake, if a court decides they don’t have a case, then they don’t have a right to anything.
I don’t think this is a question of morals, but of fairness and consistency. If we have decided that it’s okay for people to receive financial compensation for demonstrable harm–whether that harm be financial or not–then that means people should feel free to seek compensation for demonstrable harm. Whether the defendent is the guy next door, their employer, or their own government. Believing otherwise is to believe the government is above the law when it’s not.
I don’t think there should be blanket reparations handed out to anyone, including the interned Japanese. But the world continued to turn after they received $20,000, and so shall it if Jim Crow victims were to receive the same benefit.
a) is true
b) true, but as I’ve said before, it doesn’t matter. Most of the people who interned the Japanese were dead (including the president who signed the order) when they got their reparations. When you are talking about institutions, it doesn’t matter who did what. All that matters is if the actions taken by individuals were institutional policy. If so, then you have a case.
c) not necessarily. For instance, colored schools received less funding than white schools, which means white schools received more funding. Which means that black taxpayers weren’t able to reap the full benefits of their tax dollars. Not every case can be tied to money, but a lot of them can. And as I’ve said before, you can receive compensation by the legal system for non-financial harm. So this is actually a moot point.
I think the logistical questions are secondary to the issue of whether reparations are owed. They are important considerations, but only after a case has been ruled valid or not. My point is, why block someone from proving their case by citing logistics? You haven’t even heard their case. You don’t even know how much compensation they’re asking for. It could be a million bucks or it could be a dollar. Furthermore, as the case of interned Japanese show us, negotiations can be made so that all parties are satistified. The victims first asked for $25,000, and the final pay-out was $20,000. That’s how settlements work.
I think this is a pretty romantic view of true victimhood. If a government sends forces onto your property, stealing and raping and violating, you aren’t going to just shrug your shoulders and forgive and forget. Especially if you haven’t declared war on anyone, and the government makes defending yourself against these attacks illegal. Wars are a mutual fight between two or more parties. Who were black people fighting? I think it’s unfair to liken civil rights violations like Jim Crow with war. It’s oppression, plain and simple.
I think we’re familiar with the “big time” stories, the ones that had enough sparkle to make it into the press. But there are no doubt numerous incidents that never garnered any attention and yet sucked big time for the people involved. I think we’d be making a mistake to limit claims to only the famous events.
I’d just like to say, Measure for Measure, that you’re the only person in this thread who I feel I’ve had a thoughtful conversation with. Thanks so much for sticking around and really listening to what I’ve had to say, and giving me something to think about as well.