Whoa Vicky is in the details, you mean.
Reparations discussion
- Thread starter VorZakone
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Whoa Vicky is in the details, you mean.
Where the estate is still well off and was built on the back of owning slaves it should be charged to repay the taxpayer.
Their ongoing wealth is built at least partly on a crime. How much so can be debated in a hearing.
What does that have to do with this thread?
Reparations are only a punishment in the sense that being forced to return stolen goods is a punishment. And that's what this is. It's compensating for the theft of body and property and rights, a lot of which can be quantified. None of this is meant to be punitive in a "feck you" sense.
Is the government not representative of it's citizens? The government is not some abstract object floating in Washington, it was and is the direct result of the wishes of the empowered populace, and until recent, that populace (white people) used the government to impose their racist wishes on blacks, Native Americans (we seriously need another thread for that), Asians, and Latinos. They don't get to now detach from that and say, "oh, it wasn't me".
But again, as a pragmatist, I'm ok with the revenue to pay for this coming from wherever. Not set on taxing the entire populace, although as a citizen I would gladly have some of my tax go towards this before an F-35 fighter.
California was admitted to the Union in 1850, so it existed before the abolition of slavery.
There’s also an issue with “13 slave States”. In 1790, New York and New Jersey were also slave states. In 1858, Oklahoma Territory (called Indian Territory), and the New Mexico Territory (encompassing NM, Arizona, Nevada, and part of Colorado) also had legalized slavery. By the time of the Civil War, 11 slave states rebelled, but 4 remained in the Union.
It's not that localized. All of America profited off slavery. The North took cotton that grew in the South, processed it and exported it to the likes of the UK (who the Confederates courted to enter the Civil War). That wealth generated was the basis for a lot of subsequent economic growth. Going after a few plantations miss the entire point
Should descendants from African slave traders pay reparations too?
It's not reparations against crimes commited. It's reparations against unpaid labour.
How important is that distinction?
Sure. They can use some of the reparations they receive from the countries that colonized them
Also, from an economic point of view, African tribes profited little from the slave trade, compared to the traders in Liverpool and Charleston. They got the short end of the stick, unless you think cowries and antique guns from 1743 are worth much today.
While I agree that the extended effects of Jim Crow had massive debilitating effects on the black population of the US, taking away reparations from someone with actual slave ancestors doesn’t seem like a good way to go about granting reparations for the slavery part of the ordeal. That in itself seems discriminatory, as that person’s family at some point suffered from slavery. It’s not their fault their ancestors ended up reproducing with non-black individuals.
What if the family estate was devastated by the Civil War, as many were, and the loss of all family wealth with the abolition of slavery and has built itself back up over the last 150+ years through the ranks of sharecroppers, mill workers, military ranks, blue collar jobs, etc.?
That's what I'm getting at, you'll get a lot less resistance if the reparations come from existing wealth not future revenue. The US has plenty of wealth to draw upon for this.
Using tax revenue implicates the current (and future) citizenry in the crimes of slavery. That may not be applicable to everyone and people aren't going to like that insinuation. Using existing wealth limits the culpability to the Government and the past citizens who helped build that wealth.
Exactly. Slavery was a national evil that the nation as a whole benefitted from, hence why it lasted so long.
@Drainy
Possibly the largest slave port in the country was New York City. Slave ships were registered to merchants all throughout the north.
Awesome, appreciate the clarification as I didn't know the exact facts you just provided. How significant was slavery and repression in those territories compared to the South, which is where the bulk of reparations would show (maybe)?
Such a slippery slope as to how exactly does the country continue to provide reparations. Approximately 4 to 5 million Af-Am people were directly impacted (negatively) from the practice. There are about 40 to 45 million Af-Am currently in the United States...not sure if that would include naturalized citizens or immigrants though.
Phew. Expected at least one post from an Irish caftard about how the Irish were slaves too (we weren’t). Good on ye for proving me wrong, redcafe.
Correct, but I believe this distinction is often missed.
What do yall think about light skin African Americans getting reparations? Like Steph Curry light?
I been waiting for it here. Searching for "Irish" and "reparations" on Twitter right now is, eh, interesting.Hmmm...
It’s really difficult to say about the slave density of the territories, as they weren’t documented nearly as well as the actual states. I also forgot to mention Kansas in there as well. Bleeding Kansas in the 1850s is where the Civil War really started, due to the Kansas-Nebraska Act allowing popular sovereignty to determine the status of slavery there.
Either way, with certainty you could say that the density in the territories was nowhere near what it was in the Deep South.
Now, rewind to the turn of the 18th century, and you’ve got NYC in the Colony of New York having the second highest slave density behind Charleston, SC.
Which raises another question of what do you do about reparations for people enslaved in the American Colonies when they were ruled by Great Britain?
She gets the opposite of reparations. The black delegation will send her an invoice soon enough.
Hmmm...
@Carolina Red when you doing the PHD man? Got a topic in mind?
Hugely.
If you want to think of it this way (as flippant as it may be), consider the issue to be about unpaid wages.
Criminals don't owe compensation to their victims. Employers do.
At its most abstract, the case for reparations is about confirming slave owners as employers who failed to pay wages. Since the slave owners are dead, the argument is for the Government which benefitted in GDP to foot the bill (as an accrual) to the next of kin.
Hey, thanks for asking!
It’s in the planning stages. I’ve got some programs narrowed down and I’m just waiting on my wife to finish her nurse practitioners and begin practicing so that we can maintain some financial stability while I go back to school.
It’ll be in history, most likely military history. I’d be very interested in doing my dissertation as a people’s history of the War on Terror. That would mean learning Arabic though, so I might turn my focus back to Europe where my undergrad focus was, or to Latin America, where Spanish and Portuguese would be less daunting.
Well stated.
When you release the NYT bestseller, can you thank the Caf in the prologue?
If I can manage Arabic, I’ll be sure to do just that.Considering that racism and the objectification of people still exists throughout the world, any arbitrary time limit similar to a statute of limitations shouldn't have even started to count down. This makes a statement to all of humanity that things can't be made "right" until we can accept that our past is filled with evil deeds that should serve justice.
The 'time limit' factor shouldn't even enter the debate.
The case for reparations was brought up soon after abolotition in 1865, when the slave owners and freed slaves were still around and still living within close proximity to each other. Since that time, individuals with a vested interest have been kicking the can down the road for political and financial reasons. You shouldn't let a bent system, led by bent people, be the final word on justice through delaying tactics.
Which is not to say I wholly agree with the idea of reparations. There's the idealist arguement and there's the pragmatic argument. I'm not well versed enough in American law to be able to advocate for either side. But at the very least, the case does deserve to be heard - even if it's thrown out after 10 minutes. The US has effectively been filibustering the idea for over 150 years. That's not a good look.
Leaving aside the whole Irish in America angle, let's say legislation is passed in respect of reparations. It would certainly set an interesting precedent.
Last edited:
The whole idea of reparations over slavery is complete nonsense. 'Reparation' is a term used for compensation for damage suffered by victims of unlawful actions, but slavery was both legal and commonplace (a situation that persisted for well over 90% of human history). It is also generally paid by the wrongdoers who, in the case of slavery, all died many years ago (and weren't actually wrongdoers anyway) to the victims (also long dead).
This is another example of trying to apply the standards of modern times to the events which came before: yet more revisionism and moral tokenism.
If it was legal then the most significant wrongdoer is the US government for allowing it by law and the US government still exists.
unless you think that some races are more prone to success than others, its impossible to not read those charts and not realize that this situation came about through an unfair system. tulsa happened in 1921. redlining happened in the lifetime of some posters on here. the 08 global crisis hit blacks disproportionately since most of their wealth was invested in their homes.
there really shouldnt be any debate on whether something should be done. just a matter of how.
Just out of interest, is there a table which includes Asian-American?
this is the closest i could find
Have you seen the Vox short documentary series “Explained” on Netflix?
unless you think that some races are more prone to success than others, its impossible to not read those charts and not realize that this situation came about through an unfair system. tulsa happened in 1921. redlining happened in the lifetime of some posters on here. the 08 global crisis hit blacks disproportionately since most of their wealth was invested in their homes.
there really shouldnt be any debate on whether something should be done. just a matter of how.
They have an excellent episode explaining this that’s like 15 minutes long.
By this logic then I'm guessing you consider large parts of the Nuremberg Trials as 'revisionism and moral tokenism'.
this is the closest i could find
Cheers. There's a number of questions to ask from that. Do the results include immigrants, or is it just for US born citizens? The statistics for Other are very interesting and suggests there is a significant cultural component at play here.
Last edited:
I know that this is a tangential point, but the discrepancy between mean and median averages is pretty shocking. It tells you a lot about wealth concentration at the top end of society.
unless you think that some races are more prone to success than others, its impossible to not read those charts and not realize that this situation came about through an unfair system. tulsa happened in 1921. redlining happened in the lifetime of some posters on here. the 08 global crisis hit blacks disproportionately since most of their wealth was invested in their homes.
there really shouldnt be any debate on whether something should be done. just a matter of how.
Why don't you expound more?