Oh, this guy (using guy very loosely here) has a history?
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.
Oh, this guy (using guy very loosely here) has a history?
Can't say I understand your point, unless you're point is either "this thread is pointless atm" or "people don't have morals"
Either way, both points I have no interest in....
It earned him his name.... IMO more WUM than Dumb.
Who's we?
African Americans in the United States, who are descendants of slaves and went through Jim Crow, are trying to get the United States to pay up for the atrocities it condoned until just 50 years ago. What you're saying is mission creep. Mission creep is bad man. Focus, focus.
Ok in very easy to understand terms - you can't complain about people arguments being simple and dumb because yours isn't much better.
Did you watch the hearings the other day? There was anything but unanimity among those who testified on the issue.
Jim Crow? Yes. Lynchings? The majority of them would have been dead by that time, if they stayed in Africa. You think every black person was lynched in America? Come on, we both know that isn't the case and we both know the lynchings were an extreme rarity.
What do you mean? The vast majority of slaves that were brought in America were brought from other Africans.
They absolutely did. China during its years especially so. You know what started the Ming rebellion?
You have any arguments to back that that isn't the case?
I can't predict the future. I can just say this path the left is going on is not gonna end well. Might not end well for the right, might not end well for the left. Might not end well for either. I don't know.
We, as in people who want to right a wrong. Really can't see why that's difficult to understand.
You also speak as if there is a unanimous consensus around African Americans in favor of reparations. I can tell you for a fact, there is not.
Of course I can complain, and you can complain about my complaining
My arguement fyi is that there should reperations.
The guy who sat next to Coates was a fecking fraud, that I know.
I didn't watch the entire hearing. Keep in mind, these hearings are preliminary. The actual commission if formed, would be a more cohesive unit.
Also, how many points gets you a suspension?
Which means ? In terms of policy it means ?
I agree with the idea of reperations but until there's policy I can't blame people for being hostile to the idea(well other than the clear arseholes in the thread, they can feck off)
It was the same in the UBI thread. You can be for an idea without knowing exactly how to implement it... Idea comes first, then plan, then implementation. Let's see how this unfolds....
The position that it's a non starter so why bother... it's not compelling.
Goes to you too @bpet15
Last edited:
Jim Crow was bett... nah feck all that.
You are a fucking moron. Your father's semen that contained the cell that made you was better off flushed down the toilet in a rubber. Some advice, just shut the feck up when you ever want to say anything, about anything. And be grateful you live somewhere where morons are allowed to express themselves freely without being sanctioned. Dumb ass indeed. And blocked.
@Raoul I'll gladly take the 3 points.
There is probably much less debate on the general consensus that "there should be reparations." That's not the issue, the issue is the implementation of any program. Any solution must fit in the confines of the current citizenship, governmental fiscal responsibilities and equitable distribution.
Jesus christ
I can say with a clear conscience that you are an irredeemable idiot.
Again, how is that statement confusing? Any reparation will have to come from the Government, correct? Therefore, there are things that must be taken into consideration when formulating a plan. One, the citizens, how much do you take from them, and their reaction. Two, the given budget of that Government, which is prudent in any financial decision making. Three, the ability to ensure that any distribution is done so fairly, quickly and concisely to limit the possibility of fraud. In addition, there should be a one size fits all approach to any reparations - you can't have some people receiving more than others.
Read the words on the page, not the ones you make up in your head. Not everything has a hidden meaning.
I second this statement. I’ve seen a lot of stupid things on this site, nevermind this thread alone, but that has to be the dumbest post I’ve ever seen.
Dumbat12 - obviously doesn't know anything
I'm done arguing with you and listening to your virtue signaling. We clearly disagree. I'll leave you with this, don't expect a retort.
MLK's approach was the definition of pragmatism. Many blacks criticized his approach at the time. But his goal was ultimately harmony amongst all human beings regardless of race and he understood that there must be a measured approach to ensure long-term success of the ultimate goal. If your line of thinking is that this needs to happen at all costs, feck anyone who disagrees, you're probably going to support something that will actually further undermine the goal and set race relations back even further. You one-hundred per cent should be mindful of the fallout and not just say feck anyone that disagrees they're clearly ignorant, racist or jealous, I'm right and this is what needs to happen. There's enough divide in the country without that approach. People tend to get pretty entrenched in their beliefs and unwilling to listen when the other side acts holier-than-thou and instead of listening to the merits of their positions resorts to "you're racist".
I hope you enjoy your no room for compromise, because I hate to break it to you, reparations probably aren't going to happen.
Very rich of you to say don't twist my words. I'm not ignorant, jealous or racist, but that's a typical response from someone with your obvious political leanings. I don't agree with you, formulate arguments to the contrary and try to engage in discourse - must be ignorant, racist or jealous. Got it. I've presented why i don't think reparations should be made and it has nothing to do with any of the drivel that spouted, and everything to do with my basic principles about equality and my pragmatic approach to trying to make the country a better place for all. It's quite possible for one to agree that blacks in America had a torrid time for centuries without thinking reparations are the best or only thing to do in 2019.
I've tried, and managed, to have a civil discourse with a few people on this thread, but that's apparently not possible with you.
Good day, sir.
Not really surprised it came from him though.
I don't think anyone should get infractions for telling wumbat...
Oh here we go, where's that bingo card?
I don't think he made the case for reparations even though I agree with what he said.
He didn't say "We need reparations" but he pretty methodically laid out the case of why reparations are needed.
He laid out what the problem is and why it arose, but didn't state what was his preferred solution.
I've given him too much credit. He really is clueless. Imagine calling MLK a pragmatist.
I'm sure his solution wasn't to leave things as they were.
Goodbye. Your disdain for anyone vaguely "other" to you in various threads has been noted and the modmin concensus is that we don't need this sort of rubbish on here.
I'm not the only one to label his approach as such. Guess none of these people, including someone who helped organize his march, don't know anything about anything either. We're now just debating semantics, though..
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-01-15-me-24687-story.html
"The March on Washington speech was a masterpiece of King's curious blend of morality, pragmatism and ambivalence."
https://www.msstate.edu/newsroom/ar...ty-breakfast-embrace-responsibility-mlk-jr-s/
"He said King was a realist, a pragmatist and a true American who laid down his life for the good of his country and his fellow man."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/recalling-mlks-dream-speech/
"Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia's delegate to Congress, was a law student in 1963 who helped organize the march. She remembered his speech for its pragmatism as much as its poetry.
"His words were not art for art's sake," she said. "He was trying to win converts.""
I think we've got bingo already - I count; being a slave in america is better than living in africa, MLK, africans sold their own, give the money to the ghettos & everyone else owned slaves too.
Is it any wonder society can't get past racism and talking about slavery when in 2019 we're talking about reparations? It's saying the past is not the past. You are not someone with fair opportunity but someone who is a descendant of a slave. Whites and blacks and others have been slaves. The underlying theme is this isn't about slavery. It's just stirring the pot. Because numbers is one thing but a victim is a victim and these are not. They are descendants. So unless people are not being told the truth, they have an opportunity now as free men?..to have a great life and to get over issues from the past but these issues are being dragged along and they damage society and the mindset of the people.
But what am I saying? Slavery is still alive and well. Not just at the hands of big corporations but because of a dodgy money system with fake interest added on top and there never being enough in circulation to pay off that bs interest - at this point, I figure we all deserve reparations.
But what am I saying? Slavery is still alive and well. Not just at the hands of big corporations but because of a dodgy money system with fake interest added on top and there never being enough in circulation to pay off that bs interest - at this point, I figure we all deserve reparations.
There's still a few more
There's still a few more
A new one: Asians did Jim Crow too
Also, why can't society get past racism
I'm guessing you'll be placed in the NO column.
Back to the Alex Jones thread with you buddy. Keep your theories about fake interest contained to there please.
It depends how you define pragmatism, right ?
Unless I'm mistaking MLK non violence stance was a pragmatic one as he saw it being the best way to win over white Americans. Before his death King again out of pragmatism was trying to organise a multi racial Woking class politics as way to give black Americans economic rights.
And a similar pragmatic moment was the Montgomery bus boycott. There's a reason we all about Rosa Parks and it wasn't because of spontaneous moment from Parks but because the civil right movement were pragmatic.
https://www.npr.org/2009/03/15/1017...ks-there-was-claudette-colvin?t=1561154222285
Fecking hell
Quite a few gems in this thread, it's like you're on Facebook and twitter.