Been reading back through. These threads seem to bring out the morons.
That Dumbat12 post...Mary mother of Christ.
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.
Been reading back through. These threads seem to bring out the morons.
That Dumbat12 post...Mary mother of Christ.
In before someone says he was banned for exercising his right to free speech, and we’re shutting down discussion that doesn’t suit our viewpoints. Fecking idiots around the place.
This has flown under the radar somewhat but this is almost as bad as that dumbat post.
What the fecking hell does this mean? You see the difference in what? Someone from Ghana and someone from America?
People in America all have a ton of kids from different women or kids they can’t afford? They’re happy to live off welfare? What on earth is this post trying to convey?
He should have just said "welfare queen" to save us all the trouble.
People seem to not understand that the 1st amendment* protects you from the government taking away your freedom of speech.
*I recognize that the 1st Amendment doesn’t apply to all the folks on here, but you get my drift
Posted wearing blackface?
It’s quite telling that the only people who seem to complain about free speech being violated these days are right wing nut jobs. I wonder if there’s a correlation between being a fecking idiot and being called out on being a fecking idiot then claiming your free speech is being violated.
I can't get over "chimp out". Is that a common expression or the worlds most obvious dog whistle?
same, it caught m eye. i've only seen it used in the unsavoury parts of reddit, maybe it has some wider usage?
You’d not be surprised at his attempt at an explanation.
You’re onto something here.
True it's not surprising. I find that racism is alive and well in Europe at a time when it's been largely blunted in the States.
On a national scale they're huge, yes - individually though people aren't going to be bankrupted the moment they're expected to contribute, help and pay back to those who are of a lower socio-economic standing than they are because of US government policy which mandated that they were able to be owned and that they were later an underclass of people. People aren't being 'punished' here, just being asked to compensate for the theft and exploitation they've indirectly benefited from.
I banned him for that comment alone before reading the rest of his seepage. I had to look it up (as I suspected what it meant) but Chimp Out is apparently a derogatory comment telling a black person not to get angry. One of the worst comments I have seen in this place in the 18 years I've been here. I might bring him back so I can ban him again.
Last edited:
Can't talk for the whole continent, but in Portugal and Spain is very much alive. The worst part is that most people simply ignore it or outright deny it while at the same time pointing their finger at the US.
You throw out the term "moral relativism" as if it were some kind of insult, so I wonder what you think it means. At the simplest level, it's just the recognition that different cultures (and, by extension, different eras) have different moral standards. It's actually very relevant to this discussion, and I am pleased to acknowledge my application of moral relativism in this thread. I'd go so far as to say that you have to take a moral relativist position to properly debate the topic.
Your point regarding taking into account the opinion of the slaves is well made, and you're right to point out that it shouldn't be overlooked (however your assertion that they knew slavery was wrong is questionable as, for the freshly acquired slaves at least, it had long been a fact of life in their culture).
As for sweeping anything under the rug, that's just not true. I understand what happened and accept that it was wrong by the standards of today, but I don't believe tryng to right those now distant historic wrongs through legislation is either practical or useful.
I have to say that, as a UK citizen, I find the very concept of paying to make amends for historical events quite alarming (god only knows how much it would cost us!). In this matter, realpolitik rules.
“It means someone spinning out of control. It doesn't imply race whatsoever. That's the first time I hear this.”
Unreal
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/chimp_out
Started on 4Chan as a racist term apparently and there is a hugely racist website called chimpout.com
Plus if you are in a discussion about slavery and using any slang term with chimp in it that makes you racist or too stupid to breath and walk simultaneously. Or both. Even if he didn't know he was involved in a discussion with people who are likely to be descendents of slaves.
Agree
But Native Americans for example. To make them pay some form of extra tax because of the former actions of the United States government policy considering it was govermemt policy to wipe them out as a people and the poverty they still face today(Native communities are still today fighting to keep their land from the US Goverment ) seem extremely harsh if not down right stupid.
Same would apply to basically anyone who has been forced to come to the United States due to the actions of the United States abroad. Image making the argument to a mother from Hondorus and saying well the reason why your tax bill is higher is in part due to paying for the past actions of the United States Government. So not only has the United States destroyed your homeland, your now being asked to compensate the voters who basically approved of the destroying.
Still I guess reperations will be selective on who would qualify for it so it's possible that the people being asked to compensate will also be somewhat selective.
On the plus side reparations might be the only way to get the republicans to support a inheritance tax.
Last edited:
Fair point
Honestly you'd have to be a bit of a self-entitled wanker to want these reparations.
How right you were.
Native Americans deserve reparations. I've mentioned that multiple times in this thread. I do not think America has fully accounted for the devastation it brought on them.
Immigrants who willingly migrate to the US shouldn't be exempt from tax, unless that exemption holds for other taxes as well.
And this can be implemented as a progressive tax. Targets the accumulation of wealth more than the poor white folk who "had nothing to do with it"
I didn't mean it as an insult. I just don't buy your argument of using different moral standards to negate the need for reparations. If that's not what you're doing then fine. If you're doing it, I don't buy it.
It's been mentioned many times that slavery was opposed by a lot of people in the country. Including the slaves. Yes, an overwhelming amount of them. Which is why brutal measures like whippings, amputations and worse were taken to keep them in check. If you knew anything about slavery in the US you would not question that. You think a lot of slaves born into slavery wanted to stay enslaved?
50 years ago is not distant. As I told someone else, if you think everything was all dandy after 1865, it's easy for you in the UK to imagine that those wrongs are best left in the past and we all move on. If you can't link past history and legacy to current status then it's easy for you to say, it's not practical or helpful to right those wrongs and finally give black people
Second bolded point. Of course that's the motivation. It's all down to how much it'll cost, and the burden on your pocket. Who knew returning a large amount of stolen money, after kicking the can down the road for hundreds of years, allowing compound interest to work it's magic, could be expensive? No sympathy on that front I'm afraid. Pay up.
I'm not sure about the wanker part. Or the self entitled part. The burden is on the opposition to prove that reparations are not deserved. Good luck arguing against 400 years of history.
I suffer from various mental health issues and can feel quite down sometimes. But every now and again I come across a post on here that snaps me out of a funk and has me chuckling away for hours. Today, this is one of those posts. Thank you sir. Simply brilliant.
It's all good saying well Native American should also have their reparations too but should they be paying for reparations for the historical suffering black American has faced by the United States ?
Agree but that's got nothing to be with the example I used in my last post.
Wouldn't reparation cost trillions of dollars(I've the amount somewhere between 5 and 14 trillion) ?
Putting a side the reaction from captlial on such massive taxion, to achieve any were near a correct amount for reparations would involve the American citizen willhave to be taxed.( Also I didn't all mention poor white folks, not sure why you brought it)
Last edited:
The interesting thing about Native Americans in this discussion is that some (Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Catawba, Creek, Seminole) fought for the Confederacy.
Motivations for this ranged from fighting against the oppressive US Federal government to agreeing with the southern states about slavery (Creek and Choctaw tribes were slave owners).
Yeah there were even spilts within some tribe with individuals fighting for confederacy and some fighting for the union.
Yep.
Looking at the Natives as a single entity when talking about reparations being paid because of slavery is a tricky thing.
Oh yeah for sure. I think future arguments for reparations are going to be extramley tricky(Which is not a reason to not do reparations) but if on the whole America votes for a reparation platform then basically everyone has said collective reguardless of how they were treated in the past, they understand this debut to black Americans needs to be paid.
Which would be a amazing moment but I'm not counting on it(Although I never thought there would be black president so what do I know)
This is so ironically racist
Universal Basic Income is a thing so with that, I do agree we could all use reparations.
My take on things even though I’m not an American and can’t say I’m overly familiar with the intricacies of the history of slavery or in fact American history is that reparations, in the sense that many of the more outspoken members in this thread suggest doesn’t really make much sense to me.
Reparations between countries for wars etc I can understand in some instances could be a sensible approach. In the case of handing over property/wealth from one group in a society to another makes little sense to me.
I think everyone can agree that slavery and the subsequent Jim Crow laws etc were an awful thing.
There’s already a fairly heated emotional debate in this thread, and I can see the perspective from both sides.
On the one side theres the fact that black people haven’t been given an equal opportunity as other ethnicities whether this is the brutality of slavery, not receiving land while white immigrants did after the emancipation proclamation, Jim Crow laws or indeed today where many black people struggle with economic and social hardship disproportionately.
With regards to reparations let’s hypothetically say it is completely possible to identify those who economically benefitted and those who are owed reparations. You would be asking a predominately white section of society to pay a predominantly black section of society a lot of money - for what people would see as crimes that their great great grandfather did because that was the done thing at that time.
Make no mistake if reparations are made you would have white people paying a tax that they couldn’t afford and people would loose their homes. If your answer is to tax the super rich there would be white and black people loosing jobs and homes as the economy takes a hit.
Ultimately you would be driving racial tensions up significantly as you would have white people suffering while black people are given money and investment in their futures.
Some may say it’s fair as it’s ‘stolen wealth’ , it would just create massive conflicts.
What I think people have to remember is what the most influential civil rights advocates have argued for is equality - people who argue so strongly for reparations do so because they realise economic and social equality still doesn’t exist.
The answer to this in my opinion isn’t some glorified take back of wealth - it’s providing true equality of opportunity and social mobility in a racially colourblind way. The ‘American dream’ is banded about a lot but it doesn’t exist at the moment as evidenced by multiple injustices in the US and the ever increasing wealth divide. This certainly isn’t unique to black people but certainly suffer it to more of a degree
What the US needs in my opinion is to lead the way in the world in terms of massive social reform truly invest in the poorest areas of their society provide top rate living conditions, education and healthcare to all to give everyone an honest chance.
Certainly don’t see a massive social reform or reparations happening any time soon though as people with power and wealth have too much to loose.
Reparations between countries for wars etc I can understand in some instances could be a sensible approach. In the case of handing over property/wealth from one group in a society to another makes little sense to me.
I think everyone can agree that slavery and the subsequent Jim Crow laws etc were an awful thing.
There’s already a fairly heated emotional debate in this thread, and I can see the perspective from both sides.
On the one side theres the fact that black people haven’t been given an equal opportunity as other ethnicities whether this is the brutality of slavery, not receiving land while white immigrants did after the emancipation proclamation, Jim Crow laws or indeed today where many black people struggle with economic and social hardship disproportionately.
With regards to reparations let’s hypothetically say it is completely possible to identify those who economically benefitted and those who are owed reparations. You would be asking a predominately white section of society to pay a predominantly black section of society a lot of money - for what people would see as crimes that their great great grandfather did because that was the done thing at that time.
Make no mistake if reparations are made you would have white people paying a tax that they couldn’t afford and people would loose their homes. If your answer is to tax the super rich there would be white and black people loosing jobs and homes as the economy takes a hit.
Ultimately you would be driving racial tensions up significantly as you would have white people suffering while black people are given money and investment in their futures.
Some may say it’s fair as it’s ‘stolen wealth’ , it would just create massive conflicts.
What I think people have to remember is what the most influential civil rights advocates have argued for is equality - people who argue so strongly for reparations do so because they realise economic and social equality still doesn’t exist.
The answer to this in my opinion isn’t some glorified take back of wealth - it’s providing true equality of opportunity and social mobility in a racially colourblind way. The ‘American dream’ is banded about a lot but it doesn’t exist at the moment as evidenced by multiple injustices in the US and the ever increasing wealth divide. This certainly isn’t unique to black people but certainly suffer it to more of a degree
What the US needs in my opinion is to lead the way in the world in terms of massive social reform truly invest in the poorest areas of their society provide top rate living conditions, education and healthcare to all to give everyone an honest chance.
Certainly don’t see a massive social reform or reparations happening any time soon though as people with power and wealth have too much to loose.
It’s literally anyone who trolls or says outrageous things to provoke others that hides behind this wall. The founding fathers definitely didn’t have shit posting and trolling in mind when drafting the first amendment. There are also certain limits to free speech and those limits can still change as courts see fit. Hate speech should be included in my opinion.
When I read that post, I had a strong feeling dumbat12 is a /pol/ lurker.
The reality (in the case of the UK) is that the answer would be we can't afford to pay, we can't be compelled to pay, and we're not going to pay. Personally I think that's the almost inevitable outcome in the case of historical legacies of this type, and I find the moral argument in favour of paying up somewhat dubious anyway.
We're never going to agree on this issue, which is fine of course.
Not a valid argument for me (and my family falls into the categories you mean)
They made the choice. That choice carries obligations as well as benefits. If they want to benefit then they also have to pay their obligations. Also it doesn't matter if someone's ancestors weren't in the US when slavery was happening because they are still benefiting in the present from standing on the shoulders of the oppressed.
If you don't want to potentially pay the cost for the negative consequences of American history then don't move to America and expect to profit from all the benefits that exist because of the atrocities of American history.
Last edited:
I really regret reading the last two pages of this thread. Some absolute horrendous posts.