I Used To Be A Democrat Then I Did My History

[NomadPatriot]

Speaking to the Democrats Subcommittee on slavery reparations, former NFL player Burgess Owens systematically dismantled the reparations narrative.

" the democratic Party should pay for all the misery they have brought upon my race"..
- Burgess Owens

BOOM!

[Symmetry]

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]

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.

so then you would agree that the Untied Kingdom and all of the citizens of the United Kingdom should pay reparations as well..?

--> "By the 18th century, the slave trade became a major economic mainstay for such cities as Bristol, Liverpool and Glasgow, engaged in the so-called "Triangular trade". The ships set out from Britain, loaded with trade goods which were exchanged on the West African shores for slaves captured by local rulers from deeper inland; the slaves were transported through the infamous "Middle Passage" across the Atlantic, and were sold at considerable profit for labour in plantations. The ships were loaded with export crops and commodities, the products of slave labour, such as sugar and rum, and returned to Britain to sell the items. "

as history tells . Great Britain was the ruler of the Americas up until 1776.. so any slavery before that point was done under British rule & authority..

[NomadPatriot]

the united states as a country was only responsible for slavery from 1776 - 1865... 89 years total.. and the men of that time killed their own fathers & brothers in order to stop it.
all other slavery in the America's before 1776 is on the British..

[Symmetry]

So, you didn't even read the arguments in favour of reparations?

[NomadPatriot]

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

[Symmetry]

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

Meh- I just think you should read the case for reparations before you dismiss it, rather than dismiss it without giving the argument a fair hearing. All I've done is given you the option to at least read arguments from people you don't want to hear from. I can't make you actually read those arguments.

For what it's worth, you should, at least, consider that the other side might have a point. Have a look at the links.

[NomadPatriot]

so you are avoiding wanting to pay your part of reparations.

like I said..
of course..

[HitRed]

Wasn't this paid already? Arlington National Cemetery





Full disclosure - I am not the OP for those that don't have time to look.

[DoomYoshi]

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.

[NomadPatriot]

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.

( he said US&A.. United States and America...??)


"the dark sea of Africa...'- sounds Racist for sure Yoshi...

---------

Liberia began as a settlement of the American Colonization Society (ACS), who believed black people would face better chances for freedom and prosperity in Africa than in the United States. The country declared its independence on July 26, 1847. The U.S. did not recognize Liberia's independence until February 5, 1862, during the American Civil War. Between January 7, 1822, and the American Civil War, more than 15,000 freed and free-born black people who faced legislated limits in the U.S., and 3,198 Afro-Caribbeans, relocated to the settlement. The settlers carried their culture and tradition with them. The Liberian constitution and flag were modeled after those of the U.S. On January 3, 1848, Joseph Jenkins Roberts, a wealthy, free-born African American from Virginia who settled in Liberia, was elected Liberia's first president after the people proclaimed independence.

Liberia was the first African republic to proclaim its independence, and is Africa's first and oldest modern republic. It retained its independence during the Scramble for Africa. During World War II, Liberia supported the United States war efforts against Germany and in turn, the U.S. invested in considerable infrastructure in Liberia to help its war effort, which also aided the country in modernizing and improving its major air transportation facilities. In addition, President William Tubman encouraged economic changes. Internationally, Liberia was a founding member of the League of Nations, United Nations, and the Organisation of African Unity.

[Symmetry]

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.

DY- have you read the case for it?

[DoomYoshi]

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

[HitRed]

Didn't England agree to defend Poland? Then let the Nazi and Soviets take over. 45 years of suffering. Reperations on tap!

[NomadPatriot]

where's Pinecone. I am pretty sure he can explain how the Annunaki owe us all reparations!!

[spurgistan]

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?

[NomadPatriot]

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?

the US Government never owned slaves.., neither did Republicans.. so.. sue the democrat slave owners

[DoomYoshi]

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

[Dukasaur]

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]

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..

[Dukasaur]

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..

Sounds good to me!

[spurgistan]

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.

DY, do you think black people are lowlifes? This sentence kind of implies that. Maybe work on that.
Also, why do people work if money doesn't make their life better? This is just a really strange argument.

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.

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.

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

I thought you people think that people have a right to do what they want with their money. Also, legalize drugs if you don't want money going to drug cartels. Also white people do drugs too FYI.

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?

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. 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 (redlining, the GI bill, voter intimidation, etc) You fix your mistakes, you don't loudly yell about how the people you rob are lucky you didn't kill them.

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.

This, again, has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not American society owes a massive debt to black Americans, which we do. If you get robbed, do you rationalize it because other people get robbed, too? You get your damn money back.

[NomadPatriot]

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.

the Native Americans owned black Slaves as well..
--> 1842 Slave Revolt in the Cherokee Nation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1842_Slave_Revolt_in_the_Cherokee_Nation

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

he says lowlifes. you think Black People.. .. wow..

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.

those would be referred to as British Colonies. go ask them for Reparations..

We built our damn capital with slave labor

the 'slaves' as you refer to them as were paid $5 a month.. why would a slave owner pay his "slave".. ?
calculating inflation in 2019 that is equivalent to $109 a month.. not great money. but .. not Slavery..

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

weird how you separate black people from American Society... very weird..

me & my family owes nothing. they came to America in the early 1900's from the Wales. I don't owe shit to anyone...
if you need someone to blame .. start with the democrat slave plantation owners & work your way over to the Native Americans . . those are the parts of society who owned the slaves.

[DoomYoshi]

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

People work jobs creating stuff and services that other people don't need so they can buy stuff and services they don't need. The entire economy is a sham designed to allow the top to skim off the top. The current economy is indistinguishable from slavery, from an economic sense.

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.

Well, start by stating exactly how much is own. Figure it out on a dollar basis, per person. I'll leave you to do the heavy lifting of calculating exactly how much money is "owed". The second question is how much will be given. If the money is owed, you can certainly prove it in court and then win the case.

I thought you people

Who are "you people?" Also, I don't think people have a right to spend their money. The only activity I support is money and gold hoarding so that the economy collapses. Of course, both of these activities are illegal and the government ensures that inflation is always destroying the incentive to save.

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.

Legitimately every country in the world has been built up with slave labor. Legitimately every economy in the world is based on exploitation of the poor. In the time of slavery, United States had startling economic parity. Once the gilded age came about, the "capital" of the United States really expanded. You should pay back the Rockefellers for building your capital.

Instead of sitting around vomiting in your underpants, why not address injustice that still exists in America today? Or, God willing, in other parts of the world? There is enough of it that you shouldn't have to invent spurious hoaxes.