So as to not derail the other ongoing reparations thread which is specifically about black Americans only -
It is often argued that if we pay reparations to black Americans, that logically then opens up the door to many other Americans disadvantaged in history -
(quotes by some posters in the other thread):
Without going into long detail, the list of people who could claim they need reparations might encompass Arabs, Hispanics, LGBT people, atheists, Native Americans, Asians, women, Muslims, Jews, etc. Indeed, perhaps everyone, with the exception of white straight Christian men, would qualify.
But the financial math gets pretty tough if the people who deserve a victim payout constitute the ***majority ***of the population while the people who deserve to be paying reparations constitute a minority. The only way that could work, financially, would be if white straight men were really wealthy - and with the exception of the likes of Buffett, Gates, Zuckerberg, etc., most aren’t. How would that work… increase taxes on white straight men 3-fold or 5-fold?
Furthermore, where is the cutoff point? At which point is a victim’s grievance strong enough to deserve reparations, and at what point is it not? And how do we determine that cutoff point - by committee decision?
This seems like a “But if we offer reparations to African-Americans we have to offer them to everybody!” variation to me, used to shut down discussion of reparation totally. Proposing making a master list with a set of rules attached is just another way to muddy the issue, in my opinion. Each argument for reparation should be made separately, independent of the others.
I don’t make an argument based on “deserve”, but rather what I think is best for the country. If you’re just interested in who “deserves” reparations, then I don’t have an answer; if you are interested in what programs are best for the country, I think that would require some very involved research and study – I think that research and study is definitely warranted for those large groups that have suffered, by far the most in America due to discriminatory policies and practices – black people and Native Americans. I’m certainly open to arguments that it’s warranted for other groups as well.
Sure, but we don’t have to wait until “research and study” before discussing an issue - otherwise, we might as well shut down the topic until or unless such study is done.
I’d go as far as to say Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, the Walton Family, and dozens of others have received more than their share of public assistance at this point, and should learn to be self sufficient. The welfare they receive have made them lazy, and in some cases they flaunt their drug use. The have grown up on a culture that’s broken. Unable to even maintain a marriage, there children grow up in broken homes never knowing or even having models of good old American work ethic.
Well, let’s start at the beginning-Native Americans. Over four centuries of broken promises, stealing, persecution and death to make up for, and no chance in hell of coming anywhere close to making up for it, but that doesn’t mean we should shrug our shoulders, say “Whatcha gonna do about it?” and walk away. Every American History book in every public school should have a public apology printed on the first page. Native American tribes should get first option on any public land the government puts up for sale at a deeply discounted rate. If there is a tribal casino operating, no other casino should be allowed within a fifty mile radius.
These aren’t even close to making up for what was done, but it would be useful as a constant reminder of what we did and what we are capable of doing again when it is convenient.
I’m sure plenty of white Christian men have been oppressed throughout time, we just need a government funded study to separate those who have, and their descendants, from those who haven’t.
Also, I see women listed several times as deserving of reparations, but everyone is descended from women. Not everyone is descended from slaves or an oppressed racial underclass, at least in recent history. So that alone makes the two cases very different.
Since I support a basic income, I guess you could say I support reparations for everyone.
Is there a difference? A dollar is a dollar, whether it was awarded out of “deserve-ment” or for the sake of making America stronger. The practical effect is the same.
I’d say reparations are appropriate for a clearly delineated group relatively soon after a specific harm was done to them. So I can readily distinguish between Japanese-American WWII internees and “black” people deserving reparations for - what exactly?
And I think that reparations ought to be quite unusual - not compensation for every real or perceived slight. In the vast majority of situations - including racial inequity - the approach ought to be to presently level the playing field, and to offer benefits/advantages to those most deserving due to their current situation - rather than perceptions of past behavior by 3d parties.
Although I DO appreciate the idea of reparations to atheists in this “god fearing” nation!
