The concept of reparations raises so many questions that I do not see how a serious person could claim it to be logistically possible. 1) Does anyone else find the suggestion that a check is supposed to assuage the legacy of slavery insulting? Can you really put a price on it? 2) What would be the following step? Can "we"-- those of us who have the same skin color as former slave owners-- then claim to be "even" with people who have the same skin color as slaves? Do we cancel affirmative action, racial preferences in hiring, welfare, and the rest of the myriad government efforts to level both the playing field and the final score? 3) What about blacks that are descended from former slave owners? There were 3,000 black slaveowners in America prior to the Civil War. Do we have to trace their descendents to ensure they don't receive reparations? Or is one's skin color a simple enough determinant? 4) Do we require proof on the part of black Americans that their ancestors were slaves? A portion of the black population immigrated willingly into this country, after the Civil War. Are they entitled to reparations? How do black Ameicans prove their ancestors were slaves? 5) How racially "pure" do you have to be to claim reparations, or to claim you should be absolved of the responsibility of paying them? Alexandra Stephenson is the daughter of Julius Erving and a white journalist. She might have ancestors who were slaves; she's also half-white. Does that mean she qualifies for reparations, or that she should pay them? If you have one black ancestor in an overwhelmingly white family tree, can you claim reparations? 6) Do we "means test" potential reparees? Should Michael Jordan, Oprah Winfrey, BET chairman Robert Johnson, or any black American living well above the normal standard of living receive money from the goverment? How do we truly establish that slavery, or race, is directly causal to a 21st-century American's standard of living? 7) Should taxpayers whose families immigrated after the Civil War, or whose families never owned slaves, or whose ancestors fought in the Civil War, be required to pay? The answer to this is often "yes, because they benefit from slavery's role in building this country". To which I would have to ask, "If that's the case, why should blacks receive reparations when they also benefited from slave labor's contribution to America's growth?" Is it enough to share the same skin color? 8) Should the descendents of abolitionists, Quakers, Union soldiers, or others who opposed slavery be forced to pay reparations? 9) If slavery consituted such a negative force on black Americans that its legacy continues to impact them to this day, how much money will it take to overcome the impact? How much is enough? What will the money be used for? How will the money "fix" the problems caused by slavery? Should it be a lump sum? Yearly payments for life, or for a set period of years? Rebates or lowered tax rates? Again, this is one of the few issues about which I can say I simply do not see a reasonable defense. Reparations are a terrible idea, one which would accomplish nothing but severely wounding racial relations in this country. They would be logistically impossible to implement in any fair or honest way, and the effort to promote them panders to the most base instinct of people-- greed-- in the interest of acquiring political power. The saga of reparations is disgusting, it's counter-productive towards solving the problems of our society, and it will completely balkanize American politics if it occurs.
This isn't about holding you accountable, it's about holding the US government accountable. Nobody is coming to your door and asking for a damn thing anymore than someone is coming to your door to get your donation for interned Japanese-Americans or coming to your door to buy the next stealth bomber. Most Americans don't have a connection to slaughtering Native Americans, or interning Japanese-Americans, or the holocaust either, so? Blacks Americans should be "looking to get paid", that's the American way and more so than getting paid it's getting some small amount of justice for the way their relatives were systematically screwed the hell over in a most disgusting way. BTW, what just happened to your "they're all dead" argument? Now it's we're a multi-ethnic nation so whoever got screwed before I got here isn't my problem?
This is exceptionally naive. Where do you think that money comes from? The government does not "show up" on our doorsteps to demand the money because the American taxpayer would revolt if they did. It's the same reason the government withholds your federal income taxes* rather than sending you a bill in April. If you got a bill for $14,000, you'd be more aware of just how much of your salary was going to pay for government. You're going to have to offer a stronger argument-- preferably not cutting and pasting someone else's editorial-- for reparations than "cashing in is the American way". I thought this entire subject was an attempt to remedy a former flaw of the American way. It's ironic you'd endorse exploiting a similar flaw-- in this case, the manipulation of black Americans for political gain. * Part of it. The other parts are a) the guarantee that they've got the money instead of having to ask for it, and b) an interest-free loan from the taxpayers, since most of us overpay.
Originally posted by BrianKagy This is exceptionally naive. Where do you think that money comes from? The government does not "show up" on our doorsteps to demand the money because the American taxpayer would revolt if they did. It's the same reason the government withholds your federal income taxes* rather than sending you a bill in April. If you got a bill for $14,000, you'd be more aware of just how much of your salary was going to pay for government. No it's exceptionally naive to think that your tax dollars can only be spent the way you see fit. The only control you have whatsoever over the way your tax dollars are spent is by voting and that control is quite obviously limited. There is no office for tax dollar expenditure revocation. You're going to have to offer a stronger argument-- preferably not cutting and pasting someone else's editorial-- for reparations than "cashing in is the American way". I thought this entire subject was an attempt to remedy a former flaw of the American way. It's ironic you'd endorse exploiting a similar flaw-- in this case, the manipulation of black Americans for political gain. I don't have to offer much of an argument at all. Reparations have been paid to damaged peoples, excluding blacks. Clearly there is something pretty unfair about that. The form of reparations isn't something I've given much thought to. Perhaps giving blacks with proof of slave ancestry a tax-free status for life? No need to pay them, just don't tax them so maybe they'll be able to close the wealth gap.
Please don't put words in my mouth.Thank you Why do you avoid the questions I've asked ? I'd be particularly interested in your take on why the blood of my ancestors,who gave their lives to abolish slavery, isn't reperations enough,but my tax dollars are ?
No offense because this is probably a very personal issue to you, but many thousands of people died in WWII and my grandfather served as well. Being free means just that, it doesn't mean justice or being given back your dignity or even what should have been rightfully yours. Freeing slaves isn't reparations, it was as I see it an obligation on behalf of our government. I mean you take someone's family and enslave them, setting them free is all they get according to you? People are compensated for crimes in our legal system so why is this any different? Freeing them is just what was right, it wasn't any kind of reparation. A man wrongly imprisoned has recourse so why don't ancestors of slaves? I don't know how I got into being a proponent of reparations because it obviously opens up a huge can of worms but it's startling to me to see the obvious double standard. I didn't even see BK's post up there but there are obviously problems with reparations but I think it's something that should be seriously addressed.
You raise a lot of good questions on the implementation BK but they're not impossible to solve. People are given dollar amounts in our legal system all the time for wrongful acts, how is this any different? In addition, you're assuming that reparations would be in the form of a payment or check of some kind which maybe it would not be necessarily. A tax free status or even guaranteed grants for college attendance are ways that an actual payment is not being forced upon the American people which may solve some of the questions as to who must pay. Eligibility is also a mine field but again not impossible, the burden of proof would obviously have to be on the side of those seeking the reparations. I'm not in favor of a free for all. As with anything involving government, there will be abuse however I don't believe that's a valid reason to not address the issue. Maybe a plan where the most wealthy African-Americans who earn above a certain income level are given back a % of their taxable income and the rest is deferred to college grants for African-Americans and blacks who earn below such a level are given a tax free status. Since African-American wealth makes up a disproportionately smaller size of our economy then that of whites/asians, the impact on tax revenues should not be as pronounced. As for race relations, it seems you're more interested in how it affects your political leanings rather than how it would open up discussion on the treatment of blacks in our country. You want to bury it and I'd like to see people talking about it.
I'm on my way out and don't have time to respond tonight but really quickly: Is that really what my last post indicates to you...? Does it look as though I haven't given this some thought? Would I ask a series of detailed questions if I didn't want a discussion or answers?
No, you're right you gave very detailed issues to work with. I guess my comment was directed to your statement about wounding race relations. When you're black and disproportionately poor what do you care about wounding race relations when you've historically always been on the short end? I have not thought about reparations with any great depth, certainly not enough to answer with any substantive specificity on the logistical problems you presented. I did not intend to become the torch bearer for reparations but simply wanted to present that yes in fact they have been given, contrary to the comments made in this thread. Maybe I or we got sidetracked from there.
Come on guys. Are you seriously going to argue that saying African-American people on average are more athletic is racist? I do wonder, though, why African-Americans aren't as good on average in other sports, such as Soccer? Tennis?
Maybe people who can prove that they were descended from slave, or even anyone who wants to claim such status can claim a free trip to Africa and a heartfelt apology for removal from their homeland. Or maybe they can let the past remain in the past. I'm off to try to claim some reparations from the Italians for slaughtering my Germanic ancestors for the glory of Rome.
Good idea. I htink I should goto Japan and ask for some cash for their enslavement of the Chinese. But, I wasn't born in China,so it will be a tricky situation.
Probably because they haven't been playing it. Can you imagine a Barry Sanders playing soccer? He would be unreal. As for tennis, check out the Williams sisters. They are dominant and most likely the favorite in every tennis match they play. Maybe I'm too much of a media fiend and this medium is fooling me. I (and others) could be wrong, we are all equal. I think I'm gonna tryout for the Rockets tomorrow.
WRONG Capriati and Hingis were 1 and 2 last time I checked. Hingis has won more titles than the Williams sisters combined. They are artificially inserted into opposite sides of the draw in hopes of an all Williams final, and that means that some unfortunate player may have to play them back to back, which is difficult because of their power. See the US Open won by Serena.
For exactly that reason. In your opinion, who made more civil rights progress-- Martin Luther King, Jr., or the Black Panthers? If you choose the latter, please list specific ways in which you think they aided the advancement of civil rights. There are quite a few former members of the 60s leftist vanguard that will place a great deal of the blame for the death of populist progressivism on the Panthers' militant separatist rhetoric. I'm not equating reparations and the Black Panthers on intellectual or moral merit-- the analogy is strictly between the response each caused on the part of the white majority. I think whites are likely to respond to a concerted effort towards reparations the same way they did towards the Black Panthers-- with fear and resentment. This would cause a serious wound in race relations and I think it would ultimately be a setback in trying to achieve the goals of the black electorate. I've already listed the reasons I find reparations morally and intellectually abhorrent. More than anything else, though, this is a political issue. And as a political issue, it is a complete waste of time and effort. It is so far outside the mainstream of political ideas for the majority of Americans that I don't think it has any chance of ever being implemented. No matter how attractive the black vote is to politicians, the resulting increase would not be enough to offset the white votes that would be lost if a mainstream political candidate outside of a majority-black district were to endorse reparations. You have to ask yourself if you think this is the wisest way to expend the political capital of black Americans. If we think of political access as a board game, one in which it's only your turn once in a while, I think this would be a waste of black America's "turn". You're going to get Congress' ear, say "We want reparations for slavery", and roughly 500 members of the House and Senate are going to say, "Not a chance. Thanks for coming out." You can probably answer that by citing specific instances in the past in which politically unpopular ideas were discouraged because they had "no chance" of being turned into legislation. Fair enough, but unlike abolition or women's suffrage or any of the other examples, I don't believe that proponents of reparations have the moral high ground. They are attempting to cloak naked greed with an appeal to America's moral obligation. The problem, as I see it, is that the majority of Americans consider their moral obligation to the ancestors of slaves as having already been fulfilled through the Civil War and the trillions of dollars spent on anti-poverty and (so-called) anti-discrimination programs that largely benefited black Americans.
No... What seperates a top NFL receiver from a solid college receiver is maybe .5 seconds on a 40 time.
So if your family was kidnapped tomorrow you'd not expect justice but rather a heartfelt apology and an airline ticket? That's very big of you but not exactly how our justice system works.
