I am not sure how you got that. “You won’t have to worry about getting shot as long as you don’t attack strangers” is rather different from “all shootings are justified”.
Presumably Honesty was talking about the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case. But Martin wasn’t shot because he went out to buy candy and was black. He was shot (so far as the evidence could establish) because he attacked Zimmerman and broke his nose and bashed his head on the ground.
Regards,
Shodan
OK, so we agree that not all shootings are justified. So some worry about getting shot might be warranted, even if one is behaving himself/herself. Just like it is reasonable (statistically) for a black person to be significantly more worried about being pulled over while driving for no good reason. Or to be more worried about getting the death penalty, or more worried about getting a longer sentence for the same crime, or many other examples of systemic bias in the justice system.
No, this is not correct. He was not convicted, but that does not mean that the jury bought the defense’s version of events. It just means that they were successful in raising a reasonable doubt. The jury may have even thought it was more likely than not that Zimmerman was guilty, but they had reasonable doubts, so they found him not guilty.
So they are NOT reparations for slavery and thus owed to the descendants of slaves? They are reparations for present day injustices owed to any black American? Do I understand you correctly?
It’s correct, because I am not talking about what the jury decided. I am talking about what actually happened, as far as the evidence could establish.
Regards,
Shodan
OK, then I think you’re incorrect that this is what was established by the evidence. I was not convinced by the defense’s story.
Back to the topic…Honesty, what do you actually know about the countries you would have African-Americans emigrate to? Besides the fact that those countries don’t have separate water fountains, don’t prevent people from voting because of their skin color, or don’t run around wearing the robes of the Grand Wizard.
I’m going to declare Trayvon Martin trial issues out of bounds here. Feel free to start another thread on the topic if you feel you must kick that around some more.
I was going to start an ATMB thread accusing you of favoritism because the Zimmerman case has not received sufficient SDMB attention, but 15K+ posts on the subject made me think the better of it. 
I would like to discuss why we white bigots would hate blacks so much that we would give them large sums of money. Or perhaps better how we can get some other race to hate me in the same way.
Regards,
Shodan
Rounding black Americans up and sending them to Africa has always been a popular fantasy among racialists. So, I’m guessing, the Kongo is probably the place black Americans would be shipped to. Kongo is huge, poor, well watered, and in no position to resist. So, basically, the death of millions by Starvation in tropical squalor, followed by generations of Israeli vs Palestinian style enmity.
If you’re going to fight for your lives, or starve to desth, you might as well do it in your historical homeland. Which, for af ams, is the South. Full stop.
Whoa, how do we Hispanics get on this gravy train? If you give us lots of money we can all immigrate back to Mexico (then cross the border again and go for seconds)! 
Will no one think of us white, middle-aged, jewish-raised stockbrokers?
I’m thinking a big check and deportation to either Manhattan or the north side suburbs of Chicago would do. Maybe Hollywood.
There’s an obvious solution; reparations for everyone! I’m sure that everyone’s ancestors have been screwed over at some point in some way.
Similarly, the United States has been quite patient in waiting for blacks to get their act together.
OK that’s over 50 years ago.
Time to get a job then.
If a person thinks they are a victim of discrimination there are plenty of laws on the books and they can go to court to enforce their legal rights.
Which “slave holding states” are you talking about? Slavery in the U.S. was abolished by the emancipation proclamation in 1865.
You’re talking about the same government that you just criticized for ignoring the rights of blacks? So, how would that work?
Do you actually have a specific reparations plan in mind? What is it?
What does this have to do with reparations? Reparations means compensation for past harms. You have to have a way to measure the past harms done and then assign a value to it. It might not be as much as you think.
Would the non-interest bearing loans be available to whites who happen to live in these cities too? Or is your discrimination reparations plan dependent upon discrimination?
It was MLK’s intention too.
You still haven’t related what you want to pay to a calculation of the damages. Where are you getting your numbers from.
Just because someone has some black ancestry doesn’t imply that they actually suffered any damages from slavery and thus there is no basis to grant them reparations.
I think only racists believe that blacks are a burden to the U.S. and since your reparations plan actually seems to be a roundabout way of deporting a lot of black people I suspect that might be your actual motivation in proposing this plan.
I don’t know if a reparations plan put forth by someone who expressly admits they believe the “blacks ruining” the country has much credibility.
Please expand on this extremely offensive statement.
I notice you’re extremely new. Generally speaking most of us find racist claptrap relying on hackneyed racial stereotypes unpersuasive.
Racist twaddele. (And even if one wishes to pretend that blacks do not “have their act together,” mainstream America has never been patient on the topic.
Utterly wrong. The “I Have a Dream” speech at the march on Washington was just 50 years ago. It took a more to pass the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. It then took nearly a decade for the Federal government to come close to actually enforcing the Voting Rights Act. (At which point we saw events such as a “patient” white community voting to exhaust all of their city’s funds when blacks were elected to office so that the city would founder under black leadership.) Once the laws were passed, the country did not spin around and begin behaving in righteous manner and there are still cases of discrimination winding their way through the courts, today.
Your “50 years” is a sad joke that is not even accurate in terms of it sparse “facts.”
While true in theory, the courts have been placing an increasing number of barriers before plaintiffs to prove their cases for over thirty years. There are a multitude of ways to engage in racist practices without being held accountable, (unless one is as stupid as a Texaco executive).
:dubious:
More ignorance.
The 1863 Emancipation Proclamation freed only those slaves currently held in territories secured by the Confederacy. It was an important but largely symbolic act.
Slavery was abolished by the Thirteenth Amendment in December, 1865.
I do not believe that reparations are in any way workable, but I will not oppose them based on silly prejudices and ignorance.
You’re more than welcome to do this Barack Obama-Jeremiah Wright dance where you conflate my praising Farrakhan with agreement with everything he does and says. You can keep on noting it all you want but I am not going to get into an argument or discussion about anti-Semitism, Jews, the Jewish people, Jewish diaspora, Israel or anything tangentially related to Israel like Middle East politics, Palestinians, Arafat’s death, hummus, or the desalination of ocean water. Though you’re free to keep mentioning them, I am not interested in having that discussion and it has no bearing on the proposed reparation program.
[QUOTE=Shodan]
It doesn’t make a lot of sense to claim that we are doing all these direful things to re-enslave you, and then say we should spend a lot of money on you.
[/QUOTE]
I am not worried about being re-enslaved, I am worried about a resurgent, racist electorate that is hostile to minorities. Case in point: Just this week, the Legislative Branch of Arizona passed an anti-gay law wrapped ostensibly as “freedom of religion”. The States - especially the South and the West - cannot be trusted to provide its citizens equal treatment under the law. If memory serves, one of these previous slave-holding states just recently abolished its anti-miscegenation laws. I think the evidence speaks volumes.
I think the War on Drugs, the cutting of programs that help the poor, dismantling of Affirmative Action programs, institution of voting ID laws, the refusal the fund infrastructure projects, cutting government employee rolls, and not extending unemployment insurance is steeped in the electorate’s hatred of black people. The latter is hilarious but shows that white people are willing to cut their nose to spite their face in order to ensure that a fictional Tamika Jones doesn’t get another check or food stamps.
[QUOTE=repairminded]
Similarly, the United States has been quite patient in waiting for blacks to get their act together.
[/QUOTE]
Whites in 1961: We shall overcome.
Whites in 1964: Go forth! u r all equal :)!! Sorry, btw!
Whites in 1969: OOPS! LOL! HE DIED: EQUALITY TIME IS OVER :(.
Whites in 1976: AA IS QUOTA!!!
Whites in 2014: WHY ARENT U EQUAL YET>!>!?!??!?! I NOT UNDERSTAND!
[QUOTE=repairminded]
Time to get a job then.
[/QUOTE]
Sure, that’s easy, let me wiggle my nose like that chick from Bewitched.
[QUOTE=repairminded]
What does this have to do with reparations? Reparations means compensation for past harms. You have to have a way to measure the past harms done and then assign a value to it. It might not be as much as you think.
[/QUOTE]
The mission of the Freedman’s Bureau - before it was dismantled - was to ensure that blacks could be integrated into society by giving them skills, food rations, providing funds to build schools and universities, and money. This program was inspired by that. 10% of GDP is nothing and is (slightly) less than tax receipts that the U.S brings in. If the U.S can afford trillions of dollars of unfunded tax cuts from the 1980’s to present, then the U.S can afford <200 billion a year.
[QUOTE=Shodan]
The NHL would have to replace the NBA and NFL as the center of our sports universe, but we’d adjust.
[/QUOTE]
Good luck with that.
Sure, I don’t see why not. I made a specific exception because Congress has convinced itself (and by extension, the electorate) that investing in roads, schools, arts and sciences is “pork” while tax breaks, tax cuts, and subsidies energizes the economy. I don’t get this line of thinking because it’s not only doesn’t make any sense but it is borderline seditious; it implies that $1 billion in loan guarantees to a bunch of white people in Ukraine is more important than providing those same opportunities and funding the white and brown people who are suffering right at their doorstep. It makes me sick.
I don’t think he planned or foresaw these programs to be sunsetted less than a decade after his death. You have a cite on that?
No. The Native Americans got theirs and we should get ours, too. The only difference between treatment was that one was terrorized by the U.S government while States looked on while the other was terrorized by the States while the U.S government looked on.
Can this be any government and for grievances no matter how far back? Should the French get reparations from the government of Italy for Ceasar’s Gallic Wars? (or insert another ancient example).
Is there a time limit? Must the government currently exist, or are successor governments liable? Is it required that the alleged wrongs continue until the present day? Must the wrongs be in the same form?
What is the principle you are trying to establish here other than “I want money”?