No. You keep on repeating this but no. That isn't the case. There isn't another group that experienced 8 generations of being handed down as property, fueling an entire economic system and then after experiencing another 100 years of having land stolen from them and being denied things like mortgages even when financially qualified which significantly reduced the avenues in which they can accumulate wealth.
Has any country, ever, done widespread reparations for their role in slavery? England, France, The Netherlands, Brazil etc etc? Before that, Did Rome give its slaves reparations? Greece? The Ottomans?
Scrub to 25:18 and you can see as early as 1943 the US was very different in how they treated their black population compared to countries like England.
Correct? There is no group that had the exact same experience as African slaves in the United States. Not that that proves anything. Other groups have certainly faced injustices right? Shouldn't they be compensated for that?
"Injustice" isn't a binary 0 and 1 concept. It's a spectrum or gradient. Why are you treating it like a discrete variable?
What does this prove? Has any government which was involved in the African slave trade (or any other slave system throughout history) ever paid reparations?
Why do you think the mistreatment of black people just ended at slavery? Most of the land theft and denying of wealth accumulation happened after slavery. Do you understand the point of the video I linked? Can I get a confirmation you watched the part I wanted you to watch? Can you explain it? You made a comparison to European countries. I'm telling you that after the era of slavery, Black people here state side were treated uniquely different than Black people in a country like England and this video made in 1943 is a snapshot of what I mean.
there used to be some good restaurants in Oakland; now they've lost two of their three major sports franchises, and the A's may leave as well.
Not to recently freed slaves who were promised the land. I don't think soldiers removed from command were able to stay in command and say that the special order was pretty thin gruel. And yet, the families freed from slavery were still promised the 40 acres. Whether or not the representative of the U.S. Government overstepped is a different issue. There were other special orders which weren't approved by Congress either. Yet they weren't retracted. I would be open to negotiations limiting it only to families of those that were promised the land. I already mentioned that people would likely be okay without the pickup truck part that I mentioned earlier.
I don't think racial prejudice ended at slavery. I think racial/ethnic prejudice exists in every society and has done since the beginning of human history. I watched the video. It discussed how racism was prevalent in the United States in the 1940s. I knew that...
That isn't the part I wanted you to take away. Remember I already understand your premise. "Every group is a victim of injustice". I mean it's a rather empty statement but I have a specific point in showing the video and as I already know that you know that racial injustice existed in the US, that obviously isn't the reason why I showed it to you. Remember you made a claim about other countries. How to answer your question about reparations from other countries we need to also have discussion about relative differences in a country you mentioned in England and this country before we even examine the question of other countries giving out reparations. We need to first understand the relative histories of each country and conditions that effect current populations that exist right now.
Well, I don't know that William T. Sherman or his Special Order No. 15 had the authority to transfer property rights... if so, President Johnson certainly had the authority to rescind such a promise. I don't think anyone has much of a case. I'm not sure those 18,000 families would have a very easy time proving they were one of the families promised those 40 acres and I'm not sure what weight such a promise carries anyways.
When a promise is made and agreed upon, both parties should be represented when the promise is rescinded. It is poor usage of people to promise them something on behalf of the government because it is convenient at the time, and then take that back when it's no longer convenient for the government without any compensation being given.
What does the level of racial tolerance in the 1940s UK have to do with whether that country should pay reparations for their role in the Atlantic slave trade? Portugal, England, France, The Netherlands, Denmark, Spain and other imported millions of African slaves into their colonies and essentially, pulled up and sailed away, leaving them to their own devices, that has not worked out well for the African slaves, most of those countries today are some of the poorest in the world. Do those countries not have a duty to those people to pay them reparations? Does racism not exist in Western Europe? My understanding is that it does, and is often them worse then the United States but they never had slaves in their own countries, not because of moral considerations, but because of economic viability reasons.
I don't think the central issue here are whether promises were kept or not. Technically we can go the "promises kept route" by pointing to the document that declared why this country wanted to be independent which explained the core values the nation stands for. The issue is that the central issue here is simply this: Is the 1000% wealth gap between the median white and black household today in 2023 a consequence of past racial systems and prejudices that the government allowed and in many cases enforced or is it a result of work ethic. Culture, family culture etc and if the former do descendents of slaves who've also experienced segregation in the 20th century deserve what essentially is a redistribution of wealth through reparations paid through tax dollars? That's the core just of the issue.
Do you understand why I'm asking you these simple two questions? Why do you think racial injustice didn't continue after slavery for another 100 + years? And why do you think "injustice" is a binary concept? The statement I quoted is a starting place.
