Conquer Club

Yesterday, when asked about reparations, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell offered a familiar reply: America should not be held liable for something that happened 150 years ago, since none of us currently alive are responsible.

This rebuttal proffers a strange theory of governance – that American accounts are somehow bound by the lifetime of its generations. But well into this century, the United States was still paying out pensions to the heirs of civil war soldiers. We honor treaties that date back some 200 years, despite no one being alive who signed those treaties.

Many of us would love to be taxed for the things we are solely and individually responsible for. But we are American citizens, and thus bound to a collective enterprise that extends beyond our individual and personal reach. It would seem ridiculous to dispute invocations of the Founders, or the Greatest Generation, on the basis of a lack of membership in either group. We recognize our lineage as a generational trust, as inheritance, and the real dilemma posed by reparations is just that: a dilemma of inheritance. It is impossible to imagine America without the inheritance of slavery.As historian Ed Baptist has written, enslavement “shaped every crucial aspect of the economy and politics” of America, so that by 1836 more than $600m, almost half of the economic activity in the United States, derived directly or indirectly from the cotton produced by the million-odd slaves. By the time the enslaved were emancipated, they comprised the largest single asset in America. Three billion in 1860 dollars, more than all the other assets in the country combined.

The method of cultivating this asset was neither gentle cajoling nor persuasion, but torture, rape and child trafficking. Enslavement reigned for 250 years on these shores. When it ended, this country could have extended its hallowed principles – life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – to all, regardless of color. But America had other principles in mind. And so for a century after the civil war, black people were subjected to a relentless campaign of terror, a campaign that extended well into the lifetime of Majority Leader McConnell.

It is tempting to divorce this modern campaign of terror, of plunder, from enslavement, but the logic of enslavement, of white supremacy, respects no such borders and the guard of bondage was lustful and begat many heirs. Coup d’états and convict leasing. Vagrancy laws and debt peonage. Redlining and racist GI bills. Poll taxes and state-sponsored terrorism.

We grant that Mr McConnell was not alive for Appomattox. But he was alive for the electrocution of George Stinney. He was alive for the blinding of Isaac Woodard. He was alive to witness kleptocracy in his native Alabama and a regime premised on electoral theft. Majority Leader McConnell cited civil-rights legislation yesterday, as well he should, because he was alive to witness the harassment, jailing, and betrayal of those responsible for that legislation by a government sworn to protect them. He was alive for the redlining of Chicago and the looting of black homeowners of some $4bn. Victims of that plunder are very much alive today. I am sure they’d love a word with the majority leader.

What they know, what this committee must know, is that while emancipation dead-bolted the door against the bandits of America, Jim Crow wedged the windows wide open. And that is the thing about Senator McConnell’s “something”: it was 150 years ago. And it was right now.

The typical black family in this country has one-tenth the wealth of the typical white family. Black women die in childbirth at four times the rate of white women. And there is, of course, the shame of this land of the free boasting the largest prison population on the planet, of which the descendants of the enslaved make up the largest share.

The matter of reparations is one of making amends and direct redress, but it is also a question of citizenship. In HR-40, this body has a chance to both make good on its 2009 apology for enslavement, and reject fair-weather patriotism – to say that this nation is both its credits and debits. That if Thomas Jefferson matters, so does Sally Hemings. That if D-Day matters, so does Black Wall Street. That if Valley Forge matters, so does Fort Pillow. Because the question really is not whether we’ll be tied to the somethings of our past, but whether we are courageous enough to be tied to the whole of them. Thank you.

Symmetry wrote:To be honest, I'm the opposite- I was always sceptical of reparations. It's an easy out- right? I didn't do it, why should I pay? The thing is- I read the case for it, and genuinely listened. Now I'm not so sure.

The Case for Reparations

Now I'm more sceptical of the people who won't even listen to the arguments. The people who won't even allow the argument to be admitted or debated. I saw Coates stand up and make his points the other day:

Yesterday, when asked about reparations, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell offered a familiar reply: America should not be held liable for something that happened 150 years ago, since none of us currently alive are responsible.

This rebuttal proffers a strange theory of governance – that American accounts are somehow bound by the lifetime of its generations. But well into this century, the United States was still paying out pensions to the heirs of civil war soldiers. We honor treaties that date back some 200 years, despite no one being alive who signed those treaties.

Many of us would love to be taxed for the things we are solely and individually responsible for. But we are American citizens, and thus bound to a collective enterprise that extends beyond our individual and personal reach. It would seem ridiculous to dispute invocations of the Founders, or the Greatest Generation, on the basis of a lack of membership in either group. We recognize our lineage as a generational trust, as inheritance, and the real dilemma posed by reparations is just that: a dilemma of inheritance. It is impossible to imagine America without the inheritance of slavery.As historian Ed Baptist has written, enslavement “shaped every crucial aspect of the economy and politics” of America, so that by 1836 more than $600m, almost half of the economic activity in the United States, derived directly or indirectly from the cotton produced by the million-odd slaves. By the time the enslaved were emancipated, they comprised the largest single asset in America. Three billion in 1860 dollars, more than all the other assets in the country combined.

The method of cultivating this asset was neither gentle cajoling nor persuasion, but torture, rape and child trafficking. Enslavement reigned for 250 years on these shores. When it ended, this country could have extended its hallowed principles – life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – to all, regardless of color. But America had other principles in mind. And so for a century after the civil war, black people were subjected to a relentless campaign of terror, a campaign that extended well into the lifetime of Majority Leader McConnell.

It is tempting to divorce this modern campaign of terror, of plunder, from enslavement, but the logic of enslavement, of white supremacy, respects no such borders and the guard of bondage was lustful and begat many heirs. Coup d’états and convict leasing. Vagrancy laws and debt peonage. Redlining and racist GI bills. Poll taxes and state-sponsored terrorism.

We grant that Mr McConnell was not alive for Appomattox. But he was alive for the electrocution of George Stinney. He was alive for the blinding of Isaac Woodard. He was alive to witness kleptocracy in his native Alabama and a regime premised on electoral theft. Majority Leader McConnell cited civil-rights legislation yesterday, as well he should, because he was alive to witness the harassment, jailing, and betrayal of those responsible for that legislation by a government sworn to protect them. He was alive for the redlining of Chicago and the looting of black homeowners of some $4bn. Victims of that plunder are very much alive today. I am sure they’d love a word with the majority leader.

What they know, what this committee must know, is that while emancipation dead-bolted the door against the bandits of America, Jim Crow wedged the windows wide open. And that is the thing about Senator McConnell’s “something”: it was 150 years ago. And it was right now.

The typical black family in this country has one-tenth the wealth of the typical white family. Black women die in childbirth at four times the rate of white women. And there is, of course, the shame of this land of the free boasting the largest prison population on the planet, of which the descendants of the enslaved make up the largest share.

The matter of reparations is one of making amends and direct redress, but it is also a question of citizenship. In HR-40, this body has a chance to both make good on its 2009 apology for enslavement, and reject fair-weather patriotism – to say that this nation is both its credits and debits. That if Thomas Jefferson matters, so does Sally Hemings. That if D-Day matters, so does Black Wall Street. That if Valley Forge matters, so does Fort Pillow. Because the question really is not whether we’ll be tied to the somethings of our past, but whether we are courageous enough to be tied to the whole of them. Thank you.

That's a powerful argument, and it shouldn't be dismissed lightly.

NomadPatriot wrote:no . I did not read that diatribe ..
I guess your avoiding wanting to pay your part of reparations.
of course

DoomYoshi wrote:There already has been reparation. The US&A established Liberia, a bastion of Freedom, Justice and the American Way in the dark sea of Africa. The Americans spent thousands of dollars sending black people back to Africa on boats.

That's more than enough reparation.

DoomYoshi wrote:There already has been reparation. The US&A established Liberia, a bastion of Freedom, Justice and the American Way in the dark sea of Africa. The Americans spent thousands of dollars sending black people back to Africa on boats.

That's more than enough reparation.

DoomYoshi wrote:I read the article you posted. What is not answered is how reparations will make anything better.

spurgistan wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:I read the article you posted. What is not answered is how reparations will make anything better.

In your experience, wouldn't you say that getting more money tend to make things better, on net? Isn't that observation not strictly needed in an argumentative piece?

spurgistan wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:I read the article you posted. What is not answered is how reparations will make anything better.

In your experience, wouldn't you say that getting more money tend to make things better, on net? Isn't that observation not strictly needed in an argumentative piece?

Dukasaur wrote:It's been reported a lot lately that the Reimann family, ashamed of its Nazi past and exploitation of slave labour during the war, has launched an $11 million charity to help the descendants of their victims.
https://www.dw.com/en/german-billionaire-family-to-donate-11m-over-nazi-past/a-48047693

Quickly calculating the numbers, though, I see that their family net worth is $37 billion. So 11 million / 37 billion = 0.0002973 or about 1/35 of 1% of their net worth will devoted to this cause, amidst enormous wailing and gnashing of teeth. Apparently, 1/35 of one percent is enough to erase all the incredible guilt and shame they claim to feel.

NomadPatriot wrote:

Dukasaur wrote:It's been reported a lot lately that the Reimann family, ashamed of its Nazi past and exploitation of slave labour during the war, has launched an $11 million charity to help the descendants of their victims.
https://www.dw.com/en/german-billionaire-family-to-donate-11m-over-nazi-past/a-48047693

Quickly calculating the numbers, though, I see that their family net worth is $37 billion. So 11 million / 37 billion = 0.0002973 or about 1/35 of 1% of their net worth will devoted to this cause, amidst enormous wailing and gnashing of teeth. Apparently, 1/35 of one percent is enough to erase all the incredible guilt and shame they claim to feel.

I would say the Reimann Family would survive just fine on $11 million dollars. thy should pocket that and donate everything else..
sounds fair enough..

DoomYoshi wrote:

spurgistan wrote:

DoomYoshi wrote:I read the article you posted. What is not answered is how reparations will make anything better.

In your experience, wouldn't you say that getting more money tend to make things better, on net? Isn't that observation not strictly needed in an argumentative piece?

No. Lowlifes are still lowlifes even if they make more money, just moreso. Rich people are still rich people if they make more money, just moreso. The middle class are still spineless dweebs if they make more money, just moreso.

DoomYoshi wrote:Also, it's not like the money magically appears. It makes life better for a small percentage of people at the cost of untold misery for millions.

It allows other groups who feel slighted to ask for the same thing.

DoomYoshi wrote: At least some of the money will, statistically speaking, go directly to Columbian cartels (passing through the hands of crack dealers first).

DoomYoshi wrote:Finally, it doesn't actually address the problem. Slavery is still practiced in most parts of the world, including America and Africa. If African slaves want a bone to pick, why not with the African slavers who are still active today?

DoomYoshi wrote:Yesterday was an election in Mauritania. One of the longshot candidates was Biram Dah Abeid. His party is known as the abolitionist party. His platform is the abolition of slavery in Mauritania. That is considered such a radical idea that he was locked up for political dissidence.

Brazil has 10x the former slaves of the US. On islands like Cuba and other Carribbean islands, there aren't even any natives yet, just former slaves. If slavery is a problem, why not come up with a solution that addresses slavery instead of spewing hot garbage in the hallowed halls of this forum.

spurgistan wrote:I hope so! Native Americans can also talk to centuries of theft by American society, but it's hard to overstate how much American society owes the children of slaves for economic production caused by slavery and the century plus of economic and legal oppression that followed.

spurgistan wrote:DY, do you think black people are lowlifes? This sentence kind of implies that. Maybe work on that.

spurgistan wrote:Slavery in Africa doesn't affect the fact that for hundreds of years people living in the colonies benefited from human bondage and nothing has done to right that economic wrong.

spurgistan wrote:We built our damn capital with slave labor

spurgistan wrote:This, again, has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not American society owes a massive debt to black Americans, which we do.

spurgistan wrote:Also, why do people work if money doesn't make their life better? This is just a really strange argument.

I hope so! Native Americans can also talk to centuries of theft by American society, but it's hard to overstate how much American society owes the children of slaves for economic production caused by slavery and the century plus of economic and legal oppression that followed.

I thought you people

We built our damn capital with slave labor. We created an economy and shut the workers out from the benefits, and did our best to continue to use legal and extralegal means to keep them shut out.