Slavery Reparations

[minty_green]

*Originally posted by monstro *
If people want to sue over the Spanish Inquistion, why shouldn’t they be able to?

If they can provide proof that they had an ancestor damaged by the activities of the Spanish Inquistion and that this damage negatively impacted their families’ estate, then why not?

Because nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition. No foreseeability means no proximate cause, and therefore no cause of action.

[monstro]

Originally posted by Bryan Ekers *
**
Wellllll…it hasn’t exactly been one president that has taken office since the 13th Amendment was ratified, more like 25 or 26. And if individuals don’t exist in perpetuity, then who exactly is deserving of the reparations?*

Whether it was one president or 20,000 is not the point. The federal government of 1860 is the SAME one that exists today. The people making up the government have changed, but the entity is the same.

It seems like the fed. government reneged on a big promise it made. As someone who is descended from slaves, I would have–theoretically–been a beneficiary of the promise that they made to my ancestors. So why wouldn’t reparations be distributed to the offspring of those denied what they were owed? What does it matter if you are 1, 2, or 3 generations removed from the descendant, as long as you could present proof of your ancestry?

But I thought my posts made it clear that I don’t think going after reparations is a good idea. A formal apology would be sufficient enough.

**

Uh, no, their claim had merit because people who had suffered were (and are) still alive, just as any living person in the U.S. can claim damages in the civil courts. **

You missed my point. You’re citing the fact that individuals can’t be blamed for what they didn’t do, and I’m saying that argument doesn’t hold up when you look at what’s been set by the interned Japanese-American case. They sued an institiution, not individuals. It was the institution that addressed their compensation, not individuals.

Imagine how resentful many in the black community feel that the interned Japanese-Americans got a formal apology for only a handful of years of internment. You know, the fed. government COULD have given one when there were actual slaves living. There’s no reason why the fed. government shouldn’t have at least done that.
**

I would also grant that a person who was not alive at the the time of the internment might have a claim if their parents suffered through it and as a result, the child’s life was affected by his parents’ depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, but removing the issue by several generations to the point where the claimants have no direct link to the suffering is a stretch the courts should not tolerate.**

The burden of proof is on the plaintiffs to show that the companies they are suing–and not just slavery–adversely affected their ancestors to their detriment. That’s where the difficulty of the situation lies. If they were suing the fed. government for pertuating slavery, I think it would be a whole 'nother matter. Because it seems common knowledge that slavery messed up a whole group of people way beyond the abolition of the institution, one would think we wouldn’t even be having this argument. Too bad they aren’t going this route. And too bad people have the excuse of time to hold on to.

[Bricker]

Not to hijack the thread – I’m asking this question in order to help me better understand the apology request, which is itself a hijack of the thread, whose OP discusses the lawsuit. But for those posters that agree a monetary settlement is not an appropriate remedy, but would still like an apology:

Is it also fair to request that the federal government apologize for denying the vote to women?

For briefly outlawing alchohol?

For forcing American aborigines off their land?

For permitting cigarette companies to adevrtise on TV?

For issuing cigarettes as part of the K ration pack to WWII GIs?

For confiscating privately owned gold?

For falsely blaming the Spanish government for the destruction of the Maine?

Your answers to these questions will certainly help me put your request for an apology into some perspective. Thanks.

• Rick

[LonesomePolecat]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by monstro *
**

It seems like the fed. government reneged on a big promise it made.
**
What promise was that? Are you talking about that old forty acres and a mule myth? No such promise was ever made.
**
As someone who is descended from slaves, I would have–theoretically–been a beneficiary of the promise that they made to my ancestors. So why wouldn’t reparations be distributed to the offspring of those denied what they were owed? What does it matter if you are 1, 2, or 3 generations removed from the descendant, as long as you could present proof of your ancestry?
**
Or why not 4, 5, 6 or 2017 generations removed? How far in the past would it have to be before you would admit that there simply is no point in demanding revenge … oops, reparations … today?
**
But I thought my posts made it clear that I don’t think going after reparations is a good idea. A formal apology would be sufficient enough.
**
But you see, it isn’t just the demand for reparations that offends most whites. It’s the arrogant assumption of moral superiority, the claim that whites somehow owe you something. It’s long past time to quit trying to guilt trip whites about slavery. Most of us got tired of it a long time ago. Whites don’t owe blacks any apologies, just as blacks don’t owe whites a “thank you” for having abolished slavery. Quit sniveling and get on with your lives.
**
You missed my point. You’re citing the fact that individuals can’t be blamed for what they didn’t do, and I’m saying that argument doesn’t hold up when you look at what’s been set by the interned Japanese-American case. They sued an institiution, not individuals. It was the institution that addressed their compensation, not individuals.
**
But it’s not an institution thing, it’s a race thing, it’s a question of blacks demanding something they haven’t earned and don’t deserve.
**
Imagine how resentful many in the black community feel that the interned Japanese-Americans got a formal apology for only a handful of years of internment.
**
The actual victims themselves got an apology, not the great-great-great-grandchildren. Imagine the resentment of millions of whites, most of whom have ancestors who suffered poverty and oppression, on being told that they are expected not only to pay reparations but to grovel and beg for forgiveness as well. Try to open your mind just a little bit and understand that there really are two sides to this.
**
You know, the fed. government COULD have given one when there were actual slaves living. There’s no reason why the fed. government shouldn’t have at least done that.
**
And the slaves could have said “thank you” for our having abolished slavery. Yes, it’s a ridiculous expectation, but no more ridiculous than the expectation of an apology for slavery. Prior to the last couple of centuries, slavery was a nearly universal institution which existed in one form or another in almost every known society or culture, and yet for some strange reason only the United States is expected to apologize for having practiced slavery. When you single us out, it looks suspiciously like racism.
**
The burden of proof is on the plaintiffs to show that the companies they are suing–and not just slavery–adversely affected their ancestors to their detriment. That’s where the difficulty of the situation lies. If they were suing the fed. government for pertuating slavery, I think it would be a whole 'nother matter. Because it seems common knowledge that slavery messed up a whole group of people way beyond the abolition of the institution, one would think we wouldn’t even be having this argument.
**
Do you have any idea whatsoever of the horrible conditions in which millions of poor and working class whites in both Europe and North America endured for centuries? Are you the least bit aware that slaves in the southeastern United States were not the only people in all the world ever to have been exploited and brutalized? It isn’t just whites who reject your demand for what you haven’t earned and don’t deserve. It’s pretty much everybody who isn’t black.
**
Too bad they aren’t going this route. And too bad people have the excuse of time to hold on to.
**
Sneer all you want, time still makes a difference. Nobody owes you anything, not even an apology. Accept it. Get over it. Move on.

[you_with_the_face]

you with the face, so you’re saying that by paying reparations everthing will be Back to The Way Things Should Be ™ ? This is my biggest concern with Reparations. Things won’t change in the least. In fact, I’d be willing to bet things will get a lot worse. By paying “reparations” the so-called “oppressors” and their agents won’t have to hear about oppression again ? It just goes away ? If not, what do Reparations accomplish ?

No, I’m not saying that reparations would “fix” everything. There’s no way you could compensate anyone for the mess caused by slavery. My comment was directed at MGibson, who seemed to insinuate that the mere abolishment of slavery was enough to address the wrong incurred by the institution. I have a problem with that.

Again, I don’t think reparations is a good idea. Never said that I did. But I think this thread is quite revealing in more ways than one. It seems as if people can’t talk about slavery without getting defensive and personally so! As if people are blaming them for something that they didn’t do! This makes the dialogue unnecessarily heated.

Why does race only seem to matter in discussing slavery, but it does not matter when talking about, say, the interned Japanese or the Holocaust? Do you think Germans excuse themselves by saying “Well, my grandparents didn’t even like Hitler that much; so I don’t feel guilty for the Jews”. I don’t get that impression, but perhaps they do. I guess the more important question is if they do respond that way, is a productive way of handling the issue?

No one so much as leveled at finger at any individual here, and yet how many stupid apologies have surfaced. What is this saying? To me, it says that many individual white people feel guilty about slavery and the guilt keeps them having rational conversations about it. And truly, I feel bad about this because obviously the guilt didn’t come out of no where, but the guilt should be seen for what it is–irrational–and recognized as a hinderance to good discussions. How are we supposed to get anywhere in race relations in this country if people keep saying “But I didn’t do anything!” If black people need to overcome their feelings of downtroddenness and helpless victimization, white people need to overcome their feelings of guilt and denial. Maybe that we help us all move on together.

[you_with_the_face]

But I thought my posts made it clear that I don’t think going after reparations is a good idea. A formal apology would be sufficient enough.

But you see, it isn’t just the demand for reparations that offends most whites. It’s the arrogant assumption of moral superiority, the claim that whites somehow owe you something. It’s long past time to quit trying to guilt trip whites about slavery. Most of us got tired of it a long time ago. Whites don’t owe blacks any apologies, just as blacks don’t owe whites a “thank you” for having abolished slavery. Quit sniveling and get on with your lives.

This is a good example of what I’m talking about. Monstro has repeatedly said that this should not be about white vs black, that it should be seen as institution vs descendants of slaves. But for some reason, no matter how many times she emphasizes this for the sake of discussion, people want to paint the whole debate as “black people trying to attack white people”. The guilt trip LonesomePoleCat speaks about is self-imposed in this dialogue, because Monstro has never said that white people should be held liable. Since when did instituiton = white people!

Again, why is it when we talk about the interned Japanese, race never enters the picture? When they got reparations–ligitamately (sp?) or not–were they getting compensated by the US Government or by white people? Of course, it was by the government. Now let’s apply this to slavery, ok? This is not about white people. This is about the US government. Do you see why the denies of cupalbility by individuals makes no sense in this situation?

[LonesomePolecat]

*Originally posted by you with the face *
**

This is not about white people. **

Yes, it is.

It’s about black people, too.

It’s about race.

It’s about blacks demanding wealth which they have done nothing to earn or deserve.

It’s about blacks using slavery to make morally unjustifiable demands on the rest of the nation. It’s about the racist notion that blacks are somehow owed something because of slavery.

It’s about race. It’s all about race. It’s not just an “institution” thing. It’s about race.

[Binarydrone]

In reading this thread, it strikes me that if for no other reason than getting folks to talk about this issue, this lawsuit is probably a useful thing.

It seems that (as a group) White folk have a very hard time even hearing that things still kind of suck for non-whites. We hear this and immediately seem to get threatened and defensive. This tells me that we still have a very long way to go. In truth, I am fighting this reaction myself (but damn it, I am fighting it!)

You see, this issue really is not about white people at all. It seems that to me that our reactions that suggest otherwise are a little weird.

I know that I have never owned any slaves and (as far as I can tell) neither did any of my ancestors. You can also argue that the institution that fought for slavery (the Confederacy) was defeated, and that the institution that sought to free the slaves (the Union) survived. This is irrelevant, because (as I believe) this is about how the African-American community feels.

Let us say, for the sake of argument that this lawsuit succeeds. Further, let us say that it opens the door for more of them (perhaps descendants of the Chinese immigrants who were basically slave labor to build the railroads). Further, let us suppose that the federal Government issues a formal apology for these past wrongs. Ultimately, this takes nothing from me.

I am just a working class schmoe, and to be honest, the prospect of even billions of dollars changing hands from some large institutions to private citizens does not phase me (hell we tried trickle down economics, maybe it is time to try trickle up). By the same token, a formal apology will take nothing from me.

If even a small percentage of a group that now feels marginalized starts to feel a little better about things, we all gain. If actual money comes from this, and people of the same group are now able to buy their own homes, open businesses and send their children to college, we as a society have everything to gain.

I guess that the conclusion that I am reaching (as an admittedly white male) is that this issue is not about me, and that no one is trying to take anything away from me.

[apollo9]

IMO, the reparations claim has no merit and should be dismissed immediately. It would be a horrible injustice to allow this absurd lawsuit into our federal courts, and it would be even worse to award money based on said allegations. The three aforementioned companies should NEVER give into this con game and/or threats of extortion.

[sailor]

I think England should sue Italy for having invaded them 2000 years ago and built Hadrian’s wall without a building permit.

[Robb]

sailor, first we should go trip over the wall (or ditch), then sue Italy. I’ll bet it isn’t even up to code.

[december]

*Originally posted by you with the face *
** Monstro has repeatedly said that this should not be about white vs black, that it should be seen as institution vs descendants of slaves. But for some reason, no matter how many times she emphasizes this for the sake of discussion, people want to paint the whole debate as “black people trying to attack white people”. **

We all know that it would be ridiculous if a Black government official apologized for slavery, even though that person would be a representative of the United States. That’s because this issue really IS about race.

[monstro]

It seems like the fed. government reneged on a big promise it made.

**What promise was that? Are you talking about that old forty acres and a mule myth? No such promise was ever made.
**

Are you sure about that? I’ve been digging around and I haven’t come across any credible sites that purport this to be a myth.

From http://www.uwec.edu/Academic/Geography/Ivogeler/w188/south/reconst.htm:

**
Freedman’s Bureau

Congress created the 1863 Freedman’s Bureau (its full title was Bureau for Refugees, Freedman, and Abandoned Lands), which was placed within the War Department without an independent budget. The job of the bureau was to assist the emancipated slaves by distributing clothing, food, and fuel to destitute “freedmen,” as ex-slaves were called. For ex-slaves, land distribution of the former plantations seemed a logical consequence of emancipation. The Bureau employed a maximum of 900 agents in the entire South. In South Carolina, one agent we responsible for 40,000 freedmen! By 1865, the Bureau controlled 850,000 acres of abandoned land in every Southern state except Alabama, Florida, and Texas, hardly enough to accommodate all the ex-slaves. Freedmen were to receive 40 acres of abandoned or confiscated land at nominal rents or they were given the option to buy the land for a fairly appraised price. Blacks had to occupy the land to gain it; whites had to occupy the land to retain it. Thus, virtually all the land in Bureau hands, as well as that which Sherman had distributed, was returned to former owners! The restoration of land required the displacement of tens of thousands of freedmen throughout the South, and the army evicted freedmen who did not voluntarily leave their newly occupied homes! Optional: read a detailed account of the long struggle of Black farmers – Anuradha Mittal with Joan Powell on “The Last Plantation” in Food First, Winter 2000, Vol 6, No. 1.

**
**

Or why not 4, 5, 6 or 2017 generations removed? How far in the past would it have to be before you would admit that there simply is no point in demanding revenge … oops, reparations … today?**

This question is at the heart of the matter. How far can you go back? I don’t know and perhaps no one does for sure. That’s for the courts to decide.

I mean, if it’s okay to seek redressal for damages against your parents, why stop there, right? It’s a slippery slope that’s been awaiting challenging for a long time.

But I thought my posts made it clear that I don’t think going after reparations is a good idea. A formal apology would be sufficient enough.

But you see, it isn’t just the demand for reparations that offends most whites. It’s the arrogant assumption of moral superiority, the claim that whites somehow owe you something. It’s long past time to quit trying to guilt trip whites about slavery. Most of us got tired of it a long time ago. Whites don’t owe blacks any apologies, just as blacks don’t owe whites a “thank you” for having abolished slavery. Quit sniveling and get on with your lives.

I would believe you if the plaintiffs were suing all white folks. But they aren’t. Again, you are letting race and “white guilt” obscure the fact that this is a quest for justice. Even if you don’t agree with the premise, that’s what it is.
**

But it’s not an institution thing, it’s a race thing, it’s a question of blacks demanding something they haven’t earned and don’t deserve.**

You see what you want to see and that’s it. It doesn’t even matter to you that most blacks aren’t demanding anything, apology or otherwise. It’s horrible, TERRIBLE for anyone to generalize about white folks and their slave-owning ancestors (and we know no white people living today are descended from slave owners…they all died back in the 60s, of course).

But it’s just fine and dandy to make WRONG-ASS generalizations about an entire group of people.

You can’t have it both ways. Make up your mind.

Imagine how resentful many in the black community feel that the interned Japanese-Americans got a formal apology for only a handful of years of internment.

The actual victims themselves got an apology, not the great-great-great-grandchildren. Imagine the resentment of millions of whites, most of whom have ancestors who suffered poverty and oppression, on being told that they are expected not only to pay reparations but to grovel and beg for forgiveness as well. Try to open your mind just a little bit and understand that there really are two sides to this.

It’s Good Friday. I promised myself I wouldn’t swear today, but it’s hard. Really, really hard.

**And the slaves could have said “thank you” for our having abolished slavery. **

Pure ignorance. This is NOT the same thing as requesting a formal apology and you look like an idiot for suggesting it is.

**

When you single us out, it looks suspiciously like racism.
**

Why? Is the United States synonomous with White Race? Am I not an American too? Does public record only reflect the opinions of white people?

It’s YOU who’s making this a race issue. Like I said before, this will only harm race relations if people WANT it to.

**

Do you have any idea whatsoever of the horrible conditions in which millions of poor and working class whites in both Europe and North America endured for centuries? Are you the least bit aware that slaves in the southeastern United States were not the only people in all the world ever to have been exploited and brutalized? It isn’t just whites who reject your demand for what you haven’t earned and don’t deserve. It’s pretty much everybody who isn’t black.**

What does the welfare of people in Europe have anything to do with the fact that the US government perpetuated a crime against humanity? Because evil occurs all over the world we can’t formally acknowledge it within our own history?

Just because the US formally apologies about its role in slavery doesn’t mean that all other crimes will be wiped out of the world’s memory banks. To even suggest this is to be ignorant.

**

Sneer all you want, time still makes a difference. Nobody owes you anything, not even an apology. Accept it. Get over it. Move on. **

Thanks for being on my side, you with the face and Binary. But I don’t think I can stand being on this thread much longer.

[Grim_Beaker]

Monstro has repeatedly said that this should not be about white vs black, that it should be seen as institution vs descendants of slaves. But for some reason, no matter how many times she emphasizes this for the sake of discussion, people want to paint the whole debate as “black people trying to attack white people”.

Since practically 100% of the slaves were black and the majority of Americans are white it is disingenuous to suggest that this is just a “descendants of slaves vs. institution” lawsuit. In reality it’s both a “black vs. white” and a “descendants of slaves vs. gov’t” situation.

The guilt trip LonesomePoleCat speaks about is self-imposed in this dialogue, because Monstro has never said that white people should be held liable. Since when did instituiton = white people!

Yes, you are correct that the institution does not equal white people. The “institution” represents a great variety of ethnic and racial backgrounds. However since any reparations amount paid by the government is going to be paid via tax dollars, dollars which are going to primarily be coming from the pockets of white people, is it any surprise that some people are more closely identifying the institution with white people then with the entire stratum of racial backgrounds? The institution may represent everyone but the payments will be primarily from white people.

Individuals aren’t being sued here; it’s institutions. Just like if I were to sue the federal government, I wouldn’t be suing all of the individuals of the Bush Administration, but rather the institution. And as a tax payer, I would be contributing to the pot going to my award, if I should win.

Monstro’s suggestion that reparations will be paid by the institution and not by individuals is naive. We, the individuals, pay the $$$ which is used by the institution to fund it’s activities. Complaining about which programs tax money is used for is what Americans do best. Want to see obvious differences in budget prioritization? Look at how the different political parties apportion tax funds. American’s are concerned about where their tax dollars go, and rightfully so, because they are the ones who provided it!

I believe the main problem I have with the position of monstro and you with the face is their simplistic assumption (as I perceive it anyway) that there is no relationship between an institution and the individuals who make up said institution.

Let us say that I, along with 2 friends, form a company called “A”. Someone decides to file suit against “A” the company. Is “A” some nebulous freestanding entity with no relationship to us (myself and my 2 friends), the founders? Of course it isn’t! If “A” is accused of wrongdoing (neglect, discrimation, whatever) then that accusation is implicitly, as a member of “A”, directed at me as well. This hold’s true regardless of the number of members in the organization. As an American, an accusation of wrongdoing against America is an implicit accusation against me. The only thing different between the hypothetical accusation against “A” and the accusation against America is the degree* to which the accusation is aimed at me as an individual.

A few questions then for monstro and you with the face:

1. In my hypothetical above is an accusation against “A” an implicit accusation also against it’s 3 members?

2. If not why? If so how is an accusation against America not an accusation against Americans as individuals?

3. What do you think is the chance (percentage wise) that the plaintiff’s will win their slavery-reparations case?

4. If you think their chances are very low what do you think is their probable motivation for filing suit?

Grim

[Philster]

I’m against reparations, but if someone would just give me a bill, I’d probably pay it just to shut everyone up.

Really, anything to stop the crying.

What’ll it cost me? My ancestors floated here in the 1930’s, but we don’t mind kicking in some dough if it means the whining will finally stop.

[sailor]

One thing I can guarantee you: No matter how much the reparations, the whining won’t stop. I guarantee.

[monstro]

*Originally posted by Grim_Beaker *
**

Since practically 100% of the slaves were black and the majority of Americans are white it is disingenuous to suggest that this is just a “descendants of slaves vs. institution” lawsuit. **

Why is it disingenous? If reparations were only going to people who could present evidence of their relation with former slaves, then how it is a black versus white thing?
**

Yes, you are correct that the institution does not equal white people. The “institution” represents a great variety of ethnic and racial backgrounds. However since any reparations amount paid by the government is going to be paid via tax dollars, dollars which are going to primarily be coming from the pockets of white people, is it any surprise that some people are more closely identifying the institution with white people then with the entire stratum of racial backgrounds?**

It’s understandable but they are wrong. Point blank. I contribute as much to the government as anyone else. My money is just as green as the “majority of Americans”. Just because they belong to the majority doesn’t mean this country is all about them.

I gave money to the interned Japanese Americans just like everyone else, even though I wasn’t born when they were interned and my family had nothing to do it. I don’t feel like the Japanese Americans were persecuting or seeking vengance on me because I’m not of Japanese ancestry. I understand that they were using the justice system to seek redressal of wrongdoing committed at the hands of the federal government. I don’t understand why this same understanding is lacking about this case.

I feel that the federal government committed wrongdoing by perpetuating slavery for so long and not following up on its promises made to my descendants. Native Americans have managed to eek out an apology from the Bureau of Indian Affairs for all the lying and cheating this agency did. Were they seeking revenge or being arrogant in their moral superiority?

**

The institution may represent everyone but the payments will be primarily from white people. **

So federal property belongs more to white tax-payers than black tax-payers? This country is more theirs than everyone else’s? They do, after all, pay more taxes.

That’s a pretty lousy argument.

**

Monstro’s suggestion that reparations will be paid by the institution and not by individuals is naive. We, the individuals, pay the $$$ which is used by the institution to fund it’s activities. Complaining about which programs tax money is used for is what Americans do best. Want to see obvious differences in budget prioritization? Look at how the different political parties apportion tax funds. American’s are concerned about where their tax dollars go, and rightfully so, because they are the ones who provided it!**

When it comes to issues of justice, public opinion shouldn’t have a say. If the US owes Britian money, does the public have a say on whether or not we should pay it? No, because we have a responsibility to do what is right. If the courts decide that paying the descendants of slaves reparations is the right thing to do, then public opinion will just have to suck it up and deal. Right is right regardless of whether or not Joe on the Street agrees with it.

**

I believe the main problem I have with the position of monstro and you with the face is their simplistic assumption (as I perceive it anyway) that there is no relationship between an institution and the individuals who make up said institution.**

So the next time you want to sue a corporation and they eschew responsibility by citing new ownership, you won’t be mad, will you?

**

As an American, an accusation of wrongdoing against America is an implicit accusation against me.**

So I assume you also felt this way when the Japanese Americans got their reparations. How did you deal with such guilt and shame?

You are personalizing this for absolutely no reason. Suits are brought against the federal government all the time. Do you feel wounded and offended after you hear about those cases?

Why is this one so troubling for you?
**

The only thing different between the hypothetical accusation against “A” and the accusation against America is the degree* to which the accusation is aimed at me as an individual.**

Your hypothetical is silly. Comparing the federal government with a business made up of a few individuals is ludicrous.

[Binarydrone]

*Originally posted by sailor *
**One thing I can guarantee you: No matter how much the reparations, the whining won’t stop. I guarantee. **

Um, what whining exactly is this? Are you saying that the ancestors of slaves are not suffering from its consequences today? If that is the case, please support this position.

On the other hand, if you are saying that it is, indeed, probable that the ancestors of slaves are continuing to experience the negative effects of this institution, but that they should suck it up and be quiet; I must beg to disagree with you.

First, just as a gross look at “how folks are doing” I offer the following link from the census bureau:Income breakdown by race. Second, if it is indeed true that this is still happening, IMHO people should be screaming about it.

[december]

Originally posted by Binarydrone *
** Are you saying that the ancestors of slaves are not suffering from its consequences today? If that is the case, please support this position.*

The ancestors of slaves are not suffering from anything at all today. However, there is a case to be made that the descendants of slaves may by suffering from its consequences.

OTOH a recent book argued that the author and other descendants of slaves have benefited because their ancestors were brought to the US. His point was that Black people living in America are far, far better off than Black people living in Africa. Should decendants, who benefited from slavery, be paid reparations because their ancestors were harmed by it?

Unfortunately, I cannot recall the name of the book or its author. Can anybody help?

This sort of argument asks, “Who would you be if you weren’t you?” An African peasant suffering from AIDS? An Amercan millionaire living in a mansion? One can answer that hypothetical question in lots of directions. It seems almost meaningless.

[Binarydrone]

*Originally posted by december *
** The ancestors of slaves are not suffering from anything at all today. However, there is a case to be made that the descendants of slaves may by suffering from its consequences.
. **

Yeah, yeah confuse the issue with the facts.