Well it is pretty well established that slaves lived healthier, longer lives in less squalid conditions than a large number of immigrants that found themsleves in overcrowded urban areas working for peanuts. Needless to say, however, their families were not ripped apart, they were not beaten or whipped and slaves had NO opportunity to better themselves or their future generations.
First of all many, many Americans have said that slavery was wrong. It was the leadership of various abolitionist groups that led the US to end slavery.
Second, there was the sacrifice of 635,000 dead and wounded Union soldiers, who fought a war to end slavery. That’s more than the total American casualties in WWI and Vietnam combined! http://www.cwc.lsu.edu/cwc/other/stats/warcost.htm
Third, the Great Society program, on which trillions of dollars have been spent, was designed in part to make up for the horrors of slavery and Jim Crow.
We still have a way to go, but let’s give credit where credit is due.
That’s nice and all, but the Americans living today can’t really apologize for what their ancestors did. As folks keep saying here, Americans living today didn’t have anything to do with slavery, so their apologies–while well-meaning–don’t mean much.
The federal government not only facilitated slavery, but made extensive use of it. As an institution still existing today, it would be NICE if it were to formally apologize for what it did back in the day. It would only be a symbolic gesture, true, but an ugly chapter of US history could be closed.
**
If you want to play that foolish game, then that number is canceled out by the overwhelming number of casualties fought in FAVOR of slavery. So it’s all a wash.
And if war = formal apology, then what horrible crime were we apologizing for in WW2? What are we apologizing for in Afghanistan?
**
Johnson’s War on Poverty has been an instrumental part of modern US history, for which everyone should be grateful. However, it is not the same as slave reparations nor formal, written apology by the federal government.
Even though Johnson was sort of a dick, I think he was the best president this country has ever had. If it hadn’t been for his adminstration, then the country would be a fucked up place to live. There. I gave SOMEONE credit. 
Indeed. Interlocutory appeals are very limited in Texas, although I doubt very much you could get an interlocutory appeal of a denial of summary judgment in the federal system either–you’d have to wait until there’s a final judgment, right? (You could appel on class certification, of course, but I’m thinking strictly motion to dismiss or m.s.j. here.)
As Erofeev notes, a mandamus remedy is very restricted, but Texas courts do a much brisker mandamus business than do the federal courts. I actually have one pending in the Texas Supreme Court right now, and we may be doing another in the near future–they’re just not that unusual down here. The standards are fairly tough, but still give the appellate courts a fair amount of leeway to do the right thing when they think it’s important enough.
In a nutshell, you have to show that the lower court committed a clear abuse of discretion and that there is no adequate remedy on appeal. Clear abuse of discretion would be easy to show if the judge denied summary judgment in this case. No adequate remedy on appeal is the sticky point, but I think you could make a pretty decent argument based on the huge public interests at issue, the implicit threat to the viability of commerce, and the ridiculous usurpation of the authority of the Legislature. Give 'em enough cloth to cover themselves and you could end up with a very favorable result on mandamus.
**
We have acknowledged what has been done to others. Or have they stopped teaching slavery adn Jim Crow laws in public schools? Frankly you don’t deserve a goddamn apology for slavery. Everyone who deserved a goddamn apology is long dead.
Marc
I don’t want an apology for myself. As an AMERICAN CITIZEN, I want my country to issue one so that when we stand on our moral high-horse and police all those “bad” countries, we won’t look like hypocrites. Not that we won’t continue to look like hypocrites anyway.
Yes, that’s pretty much what I’m saying. I don’t deny the existence of the occasional whack job and the common potted plant, but I do not believe any of them would allow this piece of junk to go to trial. This is far from a typical South Texas tort case.
12(b)(6) isn’t just a lock in this case–it’s Fort Knox, encased in hundreds of yards of reinforced concrete, and dropped to the deepest hole in the Pacific Ocean. It is borderline delusional to believe that this case has even the tiniest chance of proceeding to trial.
Before the US apologizes for slavery that ended 135 years ago, I’d like to see the UN apologize for ignoring slavery that’s going on in the Sudan right this very minute! http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/4/20/165110.shtml
UN members who criticize the US are the hypcrites!
It would be more productive for us all to fight real slavery in the Sudan, rather than continue a symbolic battle over the lon-ago past.
Two of the purposes of the reparations movement are:
-
To reinforce or instill a sense of resentment and entitlement among blacks, and:
-
To reinforce or instill unearned and undeserved guilt in whites.
Both anger and guilt can be powerful tools for political manipulation. If you can convince your own troops that you are without a doubt morally in the right, and if you can undermine your opponents’ confidence in the moral rightness of their position, you have obviously gained a very useful psychological advantage in a political conflict.
The reparations movement can’t do anything except damage race relations in the United States. But that’s exactly what some folks want, as they hope to exploit racial animosity for political and/or financial gain.
Generally speaking–in terms of international “etiquette”–wouldn’t it be more appropriate for the US government to apologize for a crime BEFORE it criticizes another government for doing the same thing? Wouldn’t that–theoretically–make it less of a hypocrite?
I’m just sayin’…
Cite? Where are you getting this information from?
**
I don’t necessarily disagree with your last statement. But I don’t agree that the reparations movement is designed to damage race relations.
If you feel that you have been indirectly wronged by the actions of others, as in the case of the plaintiffs, then why should you care about what people not involved in the case think? If you feel that an injustice has been committed, public opinion doesn’t and shouldn’t have an effect on whether or not your case has merit. And thank God for that!
If Public Opinion was consulted by the justice department for every decision, then slavery and Jim Crow and Lord knows what else would still be on the books. So as far as the reparations controversy goes, who cares if it rubs people the wrong way? An injustice is an injustice, regardless of how the majority of citizens feel on the issue. And not doing anything for fear of offending the citizenry is not justice.
Well if we are going to be stupid I say let’s sue… The Italians. Not only they had slaves but they made them fight to death for sport. What??? It happened 2000 years ago, who cares? 
Slavery existed for thousands of years (in some countries, it still does) What changed? That now we see it as one of the greatest crimes, it wasn’t always so. That is why they can try that idiotic lawsuit.
We ended slavery in our country with a constitutional amendment. That says more then any apology ever can. We can already criticize other governments who engage in slavery without being hypocrites.
Marc
Last weekend, David Horowitz was on Book TV talking about his book Uncivil Wars: The Controversy over Reparations for Slavery.
If you go to the site, it gives some book reviews that give some of his ideas, but it is too bad that everyone that has posted here didn’t see it.
The last few posts in this thread made me come out of lurk mode.
First off, let me say that I don’t think the African-Americans of today “need” (and that’s a choice word) reparations and I really don’t think the case being discussed will hold up. But that aside, IMO, some of the arguments being presented in this thread seem to show a failure on the part of some of the Dopers in comprehending the true ugliness of what was American Slavery.
december wrote:
"It would be more productive for us all to fight real slavery in the Sudan, rather than continue a symbolic battle over the lon-ago past.
Why does it seem like by calling it a “long-ago” past, this an issue you are trying to basically sweep under the rug? And symbolic or not, to me it is significant that the government can’t muster up something as simple as an apology for slavery and all its government-sanctioned sequela, when it can do the same for other misdeeds.
Marc wrote:
"We have acknowledged what has been done to others. Or have they stopped teaching slavery adn Jim Crow laws in public schools? Frankly you don’t deserve a goddamn apology for slavery. Everyone who deserved a goddamn apology is long dead. "
WTF? Are you saying that upon abolition of slavery, everything was Back to The Way Things Should Have Been ™? That centuries of slavery didn’t leave an indelible mark on not only those who had been through it, but their children and their children’s children? And surely you are also aware that there are a great number of people still alive who clearly remember when Jim Crow was alive and kicking. Shit, my parents (who are only in their 50’s, mind you) can remember “Whites Only” signs.
I don’t know how much a public apology would do and I’m not having restless nights over the issue (rest assured), but it’s kind of funny that people are acting as if a simple “We are sorry” is too much to ask for the desendants of slaves. Instead of acknowledgement, it seems all we (and I mean all of us) get are excuses. “Well, it was legal then”. “Well, they had it better than most whites at the time.” “Well, all groups have been oppressed at one point or another.” or my personal favorite: “Well, it all happened so loooong ago.” BULLSHIT.
Slavery was not inconsequential. I think most people agree with this. But if it is generally understood that it was not inconsequential, why do so many people think it’s best to shut up about it? The effects are still with us today!
Monstro, I think we see eye-to-eye on this for the most part. Good holding it down.
First of all, there is no question that slavery in the united states was a horrible thing. But I’m sick of feeling guilty about it. I had nothing to do with it, because I wasn’t alive. Nor was I alive during Jim Crowe. My ancesters were immigrants from Norway and Germany and therefore had nothing to do with it. I have absolutely no reason to feel guilt or shame over something that had nothing to do with me. Yet, I do feel guilty. Why? Yes I’m “white”, but so what? That doesn’t make me guilty of anything. I’ve never discriminated against anyone in my life. Maybe it’s constantly being reminded about what whites did during slavery or how whites acted during Jim Crowe. But, unless I’m mistaken, a person can’t be held responsible for something that a person with the same skin color did. Especially if it happened 150+ years ago.
If these companies are forced to pay these rediculous sums of money, where do you think this money will come from? What about the employees of the companies that are African-American? What about the employees that are immigrants or are the descendants of immigrants? If these people lose thier jobs when the companies fold, what are they supposed to do? Why should they be punished?
Racism is a terrible thing. It sickens me that people can’t get over thier differences and live together in peace without ever thinking about skin color. But as long as we are constantly bombarded with reminders about our differences, we will probably never be able to concentrate on our similarities. We are all human beings damnit. It’s so frustrating to me that I probably won’t live long enough to see a time when race isn’t an issue. When people can see each other as fellow human beings and nothing more.
But, instead we bicker, fight and start wars about skin color, race, ethnicity, religion etc… while never seeing how rediculous it is to fight over things like that.
The federal government actively refuses to acknowledge its role in the maintenance of slavery by refusing to issue an apology. You can’t get this acknowledgement from looking at the 13th amendment.
IMO, we WOULD be hypocrites if we tried to tell another country they were wrong to have slaves. We won’t even go on the record and apologize for the wrongness of our own brand of slavery, so why would anyone care to listen to us?
Believe it or not, I do see what you are saying,** MGibson**. I really do. But I can’t simply shrug my shoulders and forget. Like you with the face, I’m not losing any sleep over this, but it IS something that frustrates me when I think about it.
Not to pick on Airbeck or anything, but I think the statement above reveals why discussing this issue is so difficult. White people feel guilty and with this feeling of guilt comes defensiveness. When people get defensive, they want to avoid the issue. Not confront it.
No one is asking anyone to feel guilty over slavery!! Airbeck, you don’t have to give an alibi for your whole ancestry to remove yourself from blame, because no one is blaming you personally. I’ve heard soooo many people say. “Well, my ancestors didn’t even own slaves.” And I’m thinking, so what? Does that mean that it’s a non-issue then? Does that mean that no one is to be held accountable for what happened, even if that “responsibility” exists on paper only?
Again, we get the “Well, it happened so looong ago” horse trotted out. And again, I have to remind you that I]a person* is not being held responsible for something that happened “150+ years ago” (and mind you, Jim Crow laws were in practice less than 40 years ago!), an institution is. You are seeing a finger being pointed at you, but it is an imagined finger. No one is suing you, and no one is blaming you! Why be so defensive, Airbeck?
This has nothing to do with differences and has all to do with addressing past wrongs. And yes, we are all human beings; this should not be forgotten. And yes, race shouldn’t be an issue. But it is. Now we could pretend that it isn’t, but how will that make things better? I guess it would help some people overcome feelings of guilt, but how does it help those who live in reality?
On behalf of the federal government–“We the People” and all that–I would like to apologize for that slavery thing. Really. We’re awfully sorry about that whole affair, and we feel just terrible that it ever happened.
By the same token, I have here a cable from the people of Rome apologizing for that Christians-to-the-lions deal, and I hear that the Spanish are very, very sorry about the Inquisition. On a more obscure note, I also have a letter from the descendants of one William Bonnet Phillips, to the descendants of Harold S. Evans. It seems they are just apoplectic over the discovery that their ancestor won Mr. Evans’ horse and wagon while playing poker with a marked deck. The descrendants of Pol Pot, on the other hand, have asked the Cambodian people to go do very rude, anatomically questionable things to themselves.
If there are any more substance-free, rhetorical pronouncements of historical regret that would make your day brighter, you just let me know and I’ll see what I can do.
Then stop. No ones making you feel guilty but yourself.
**
The defendents of this case aren’t Whitey, Inc. No one is suing all the white folks, so just chill.
**
The interned Japanese-Americans received money from the fed. government. That is, they got tax money. Tax money that they contributed to if they paid income taxes. Were they punishing themselves?
Don’t think of it as punishment. Think of it as paying back a debt.
Now, let’s say, for entertainment purposes, that it was 1920 instead of 2002. Instead of 0 former slaves being alive, let’s say there’s about 1000. If these people were to go after the companies involved in the suit–or maybe the federal government–would they be “punishing” people? Even all those newly arrived immigrants who had nothing to do with slavery? No. They would be seeking damages just as the interned Japanese-Americans did fifty years after their internment. And while it’s unfortunate that those poor immigrants would have to contribute to reparations for something they knew nothing about, that’s just the price they would have to pay to call themselves American.
If you paid taxes in '98, you were “punished” by the interned Japanese-Americans. And you probably weren’t even alive back when they were interned. The horror!
**
It’s so easy to see this thing as a race issue, when it doesn’t have to be. If we were talking about white slaves rather than black, would the issue be treated differently?
I have tried my best to stay away from race in my arguments because it tends to obsure things a bit. Everyone here seems to be looking at this as a black versus white thing, rather than a slave versus oppressor thing. Does the absurdity of the case change if we blot out the race of the players? Does it help us see the situation a little more objectively?
**
This isn’t a fight about any of those things, though. It’s a fight about real or perceived injustice. Just because we’re afraid it will strike up a heated dialogue about race (which I don’t think is a bad thing), that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t allow people to pursue whatever legal angles they dream up. This one will probably be thrown out. But there will most likely be more, and shooting them down over fear ain’t going to help.