Uncomfortable Conversations with a Black man

[Thermal]

Okay... from whom?

And do they need to be able to prove dependency from slaves in the US after the US declared independence? What if they're descended from Caribbean our south American slaves?

What about my sister, who is mixed? On her father's side, they are very probably descended from slaves, but are also descended from Native American slavers. On our mother's side, she's descended from early settlers who owned slaves, but also from early Irish immigrants who were slaves. How much reparations is she due? Is it prorated?

Good questions. And the US government had slavery existing for only the first 80 some years of its existence, and was aggresively phasing the trade out from its Independence through Emancipation. The inception of centuries of slavery were in the lap of the British Colonial Empire and Aftican Slavers, and of course the individual estates of actual owners. They need be on the hook first. Putting it on the current US govt (meaning today's and tomorrow's taxpayers) seems like going after the easiest pockets on the docket, rather than the dramatically most guilty. Does that same government who fought so relentlessly to end slavery have any credit there? If we have a government by the people, it sure seems that the people who enslaved have the lion's share of reparations, not the Ellis Island immigrants.

 

[Mumbles]

I'm afraid you're wasting pixels. Your stance = standing in solidarity with White Supremacy (apparently).

Putting aside, for the moment, the gibberish nonword "wokescolds", which renders the snipped section meaningless...

I'll note that neither recorded person says says that they participated in any property destruction - yet again, black people are not all the same person in different outfits, since quite a few of you seem to have difficulty understanding this concept, and make the same mistake over and over. But they do both note that it's a bad idea to pay absolutely no attention to your surroundings, especially when your friends are openly slapping people around and robbing them in front of you. Once that person pulls a gun and starts shooting, it's too late to say "But *I* didn't beat and rob them!" That guy's in a rage, he doesn't care.

Same thing for the people looting - it's too late to tell them "But it's wrong to steal." You've been hanging out with thieves, while they were thieving, the entire time, and then flaunting the stolen goods directly in front of the people who were the victims.

(And of course, it doesn't help that the same cops that beat people and fill entire blocks with tear gas when people are just marching and chanting, mysteriously vanish as soon as people begin breaking into major retailers, only to reemerge at press conferences hours later.)

And again, I find the cycling analogy to be badly flawed - a better one would be people who insist on going to Toupee Fiasco's rallies because "COVID's a hoax", and cursing the medical teams when they test positive for COVID. But the Monopoly one works too - as does Tupac's food analogy.

 

[Mumbles]

And how will the funds for that be produced?

Bonds, tax funds, and the like - same as for everything else the government does. Businesses can pay from profits, stock selloffs, and the like - again, same way they pay for everything else.

Okay then... Irish indentured servants who were shipped to the US against their will.

As I recall, most Irish immigrants to the US arrived freely due to the potato famine of the 1840s, long after the practice of indentured servitude was mostly abandoned in the mid-late 1600s, and was mostly voluntary, although there were certainly examples of people kidnapped and sold into indentured servitude. I suppose that, if one could show beneficiaries, and harm, this would be feasible reparations.

But that's basically irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

That's very questionable logic there. It doesn't allow for any white person to actually NOT support white supremacism. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't set-up.

That is questionable logic but isn't that the way it works?

 

[theprestige]

Putting aside, for the moment, the gibberish nonword "wokescolds", which renders the snipped section meaningless...

LOL.

One of the great powers of English is the power to create new words pretty much at will, especially by combining two existing words. "Wokescolds" has a pretty clear and relevant meaning in this discussion. Being fluent in English and also pretending that you don't know how English works or what a portmanteau is doesn't really help you address the points that have been raised. It's not even a very good strategy for dismissing points you don't want to address.

 

[Vixen]

Okay... from whom?

And do they need to be able to prove dependency from slaves in the US after the US declared independence? What if they're descended from Caribbean our south American slaves?

What about my sister, who is mixed? On her father's side, they are very probably descended from slaves, but are also descended from Native American slavers. On our mother's side, she's descended from early settlers who owned slaves, but also from early Irish immigrants who were slaves. How much reparations is she due? Is it prorated?

Yes, why not? The government doesn't have any problem calculating each person's taxes. Why would this be a problem? Putting up a resistance already?

The former slave owners were handsomely compensated after the abolition of slavery so why would it be a problem compensating the true victims here via their descendants?

 

[Vixen]

Since "The State" that practiced chattel slavery in North America for the preponderance of its existence was England, is Great Britain on the hook for reparations to descendants of British slaves now citizens of the U.S.?

The US gained independence 1776 so it took on all of the wealth and assets of the former colony.

 

[Vixen]

And how will the funds for that be produced?



Okay then... Irish indentured servants who were shipped to the US against their will.

Via taxes and then redistributed. Next objection...?

 

[Vixen]

Good questions. And the US government had slavery existing for only the first 80 some years of its existence, and was aggresively phasing the trade out from its Independence through Emancipation. The inception of centuries of slavery were in the lap of the British Colonial Empire and Aftican Slavers, and of course the individual estates of actual owners. They need be on the hook first. Putting it on the current US govt (meaning today's and tomorrow's taxpayers) seems like going after the easiest pockets on the docket, rather than the dramatically most guilty. Does that same government who fought so relentlessly to end slavery have any credit there? If we have a government by the people, it sure seems that the people who enslaved have the lion's share of reparations, not the Ellis Island immigrants.

Just simply recharge it.

 

[Distracted1]

The US gained independence 1776 so it took on all of the wealth and assets of the former colony.

Nice dodge. Yet unsatisfactory. The U.S. became a Nation in 1776, prior to that, it was part of the British empire- and administered by agents of such. "Profits" of this enterprise flowed to England- ergo- by your logic England is on the hook for some reparations, so is France, and Spain.

 

[theprestige]

Nice dodge. Yet unsatisfactory. The U.S. became a Nation in 1776, prior to that, it was part of the British empire- and administered by agents of such. "Profits" of this enterprise flowed to England- ergo- by your logic England is on the hook for some reparations, so is France, and Spain.

I'd say you're the one dodging. Reparations, like funerals, are for the living. Reparations are a part of the conversation ab American society and policy today, because black Americans are still suffering from racism in American society and policy today. Americans are in a position to do something about it today. Deferring American action in favor of debating the conundrum of European liability is a dodge.

---

ETA:
In fact it's a double dodge. First you're dodging the actual question of the Black situation in America today, and how recent American policy has contributed to the situation today. Second you're dodging your responsibility to show the relevance of the European conundrum. Instead of asking BS questions about Europe, you should be explaining why Europe is relevant and why the question of reparations in America must address Europe as well. And then you should be answering questions about your reasons for including Europe and what you think that means for the issue of reparations in America.

 

[Distracted1]

I'd say you're the one dodging. Reparations, like funerals, are for the living. Reparations are a part of the conversation ab American society and policy today, because black Americans are still suffering from racism in American society and policy today. Americans are in a position to do something about it today. Deferring American action in favor of debating the conundrum of European liability is a dodge.

---

ETA:
In fact it's a double dodge. First you're dodging the actual question of the Black situation in America today, and how recent American policy has contributed to the situation today. Second you're dodging your responsibility to show the relevance of the European conundrum. Instead of asking BS questions about Europe, you should be explaining why Europe is relevant and why the question of reparations in America must address Europe as well. And then you should be answering questions about your reasons for including Europe and what you think that means for the issue of reparations in America.

Not a dodge at all. it is a direct response to the claims made by the poster that. "any African American descendant of Slaves should be given reparations", and that " the victims of war crimes should be given reparations by the State that perpetrated the crime against them"

If the logic is that the reparations to the descendants of the long dead victims of the crime should be paid out by the governments that benefited from the practice- then the Governments of England, France, Spain, and Sierra Leone are also on the hook to pony-up some funds.

 

[bluesjnr]

Not a dodge at all. it is a direct counter to the claims made by the poster that. "any African American descendant of Slaves should be given reparations", and that " the victims of war crimes should be given reparations by the State that perpetrated the crime against them"

If the logic is that the reparations to the descendants of the long dead victims of the crime should be paid out by the governments that benefited from the practice- then the Governments of England, France, Spain, and Sierra Leone are also on the hook to pony-up some funds.

Can you (and some others) make your mind up about England and Britain?

I need to know if I'm to divest my portfolio somewhat.

 

[Thermal]

I'd say you're the one dodging. Reparations, like funerals, are for the living. Reparations are a part of the conversation ab American society and policy today, because black Americans are still suffering from racism in American society and policy today. Americans are in a position to do something about it today. Deferring American action in favor of debating the conundrum of European liability is a dodge.

Didn't D1's post reply to the idea of the current USG being financially liable for the institution of slavery? Those reparations need to be taken up with Great Britain et al. The fledgling USG dismantled it in short order, historically speaking, and he addressed why squarely.

---

ETA:
In fact it's a double dodge. First you're dodging the actual question of the Black situation in America today, and how recent American policy has contributed to the situation today. Second you're dodging your responsibility to show the relevance of the European conundrum. Instead of asking BS questions about Europe, you should be explaining why Europe is relevant and why the question of reparations in America must address Europe as well. And then you should be answering questions about your reasons for including Europe and what you think that means for the issue of reparations in America.

The vids being Uncomfortably Conversed about lay responsibility for today's Target burning on the actions of historical figures. No one gets to justify today's violent crimes by appropriating the sufferings of past others by proxy. That concept perpetuates the divide and stalls the Conversation, IMO.

If we want to talk about Reparation check-cutting due to Jim Crow and similar, we would first have to revisit our concept of Law, especially re Statute of Limitations and responsibilities of Incorporated representatives. Or are we talking about Reparations as a kind of symbolic goodwill donation, or what?

 

[Thermal]

Can you (and some others) make your mind up about England and Britain?

I need to know if I'm to divest my portfolio somewhat.

The responsible party would be the Crown at the time in question, no? Broadly the British Empire. Might need a barrister to determine the responsible party today. The House of Windsor or something. People over there that talk funny in any event. As long as we pass that buck eastward, we're good here.

 

[theprestige]

Can you (and some others) make your mind up about England and Britain?

I need to know if I'm to divest my portfolio somewhat.

How about this: You explain the difference, why it matters, and in what contexts it's important to avoid confusion and misunderstanding.

I'm pretty sure it's not important in this context, and that everyone knows what we're talking about either way. So I probably won't make up my mind here, but based on your explanation I'll probably make up my mind somewhere else where it actually matters.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Yes, why not? The government doesn't have any problem calculating each person's taxes. Why would this be a problem? Putting up a resistance already?

The former slave owners were handsomely compensated after the abolition of slavery so why would it be a problem compensating the true victims here via their descendants?

Probably because a whole, whole lot of white people back then didn't own slaves at all, and additionally because a whole, whole lot of white (and miscellaneous colors) people now aren't descended from slave owners. Also because a lot of black people in the US aren't descended from slaves, and a lot of them that are won't be able to prove it because records weren't well kept... and also because a whole lot of other people of various colors were disenfranchised by historical systems in the US, including Chinese and Hispanic immigrants.

 

[rockinkt]

My great, great, great uncle half-removed from my married aunt's sister's kid - died in the war to free the slaves. I am told that our family would have owned half the State of New Jersey if he hadn't had gone to fight for the freedom of black slaves in the South. He was drafted so he didn't do this willingly.

His death caused great anguish and great poverty amongst our family and we have never been able to get ourselves out the cycle of deep poverty that started when he was killed.
To whom should I send the bill?

 

[CaptainHowdy]

My great, great, great uncle half-removed from my married aunt's sister's kid - died in the war to free the slaves. I am told that our family would have owned half the State of New Jersey if he hadn't had gone to fight for the freedom of black slaves in the South. He was drafted so he didn't do this willingly.

His death caused great anguish and great poverty amongst our family and we have never been able to get ourselves out the cycle of deep poverty that started when he was killed.
To whom should I send the bill?

Then there's my great great grandfathers who came through Ellis Island. They took jobs that paid way below minimum wage. They worked for more than 7.5 hours a day and 37.5 hours in a week without over time. They didn't get ten minute breaks for every four hours they worked. No paid vacation. No health insurance. No social security benefits. Nothing. What am I owed?

 

[pgwenthold]

My great, great, great uncle half-removed from my married aunt's sister's kid - died in the war to free the slaves. I am told that our family would have owned half the State of New Jersey if he hadn't had gone to fight for the freedom of black slaves in the South. He was drafted so he didn't do this willingly.

His death caused great anguish and great poverty amongst our family and we have never been able to get ourselves out the cycle of deep poverty that started when he was killed.
To whom should I send the bill?

That amount of ignorance is pretty embarrassing.