Should African-Americans Receive Reparations?

[Bowel]

Earl Douglas says yes... but I gotta go with a HELL NO!!! :thumbdown:


Slavery was a huge part of the economy for many African countries by the African people themselves. It's African countries that should pay the reparations.

There is adequate evidence citing case after case of African control of segments of the trade. Several African nations such as the Ashanti of Ghana and the Yoruba of Nigeria had economies largely depending on the trade. African peoples such as the Imbangala of Angola and the Nyamwezi of Tanzania would serve as intermediaries or roving bands warring with other African nations to capture Africans for Europeans.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_slave_trade

[CJJames]

Earl? Did you start a new account?

[EliSnow]

Earl Douglas says yes... but I gotta go with a HELL NO!!! :thumbdown:


Slavery was a huge part of the economy for many African countries by the African people themselves. It's African countries that should pay the reparations.





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_slave_trade

Um, that's not really a great argument against reparations in this country, since it only addresses how certain africans benefitted from the slave trade.

[Tazznum1]

They do know if they received it, it would be divided and divided and divided up to every ancestor that 1 slave had. So Earl would end up with a plot of land the size of a dollar bill and a mule piece the size of a hot dog. Oh I wonder who'd be responsible for paying the property tax on the parcel.

[ChrisTheCop]

If you were a slave, you definitely deserve reparations.

Other than that, you have the same opportunity to become rich in this country that I have.

[underdog]

If you were a slave, you definitely deserve reparations.

Other than that, you have the same opportunity to become rich in this country that I have.

While I don't agree with reparations at all, there's no way you can say that a black male has had the same opportunity as a white male to become rich in this country.

[Tazznum1]

If they somehow by some bizarro gov't, will we then take back quotas and other nonsense? If so, Earl might be out of a job and only have a clump of mud in one hand and a hotdog in the other for his reparations sitting in his mold apartment drinking ginger ale, eating crackers wondering where it all went wrong.

[ChrisTheCop]

While I don't agree with reparations at all, there's no way you can say that a black male has had the same opportunity as a white male to become rich in this country.

I said that a black male has the same opportunity to get rich as I do.

[Tazznum1]

Who has it easier, black men or black women in the work force?

[RhinoinMN]

Who has it easier, black men or black women in the work force?

Hey! Start your own thread!

[Bowel]

Um, that's not really a great argument against reparations in this country, since it only addresses how certain africans benefitted from the slave trade.





But if the customs and traditions of those Afican society deemed slave trade legal and appropriate in African culture for centuries, then why should other cultures not respect African values.

Moreover, the modern concept of human rights didn't exist during those time in any culture. So to "compensate" a group of people when the idea of freedom for all individuals (men, women, races etc) evolved relatively recently in history is ludicrious. How do you know something is wrong when the concept of modern freedom did not exist? It wasn't as if the idea of individual freedom came from Africa.

[ChrisTheCop]

Hey! Start your own thread!

he cant. he hasnt reached 100 posts yet. :flush:

[Bowel]

While I don't agree with reparations at all, there's no way you can say that a black male has had the same opportunity as a white male to become rich in this country.



Would you say that a black male has the same opportunity as an Asian, Hispanic or Native American male to become rich in this country?

[Tazznum1]

Hey! Start your own thread!


Oops, sorry for the threadjack. I'm used to my board where OT goes in every topic and the thread gets derailed to another subject easily. Will try to stay on point.

[underdog]

Would you say that a black male has the same opportunity as an Asian, Hispanic or Native American male to become rich in this country?

I think a black male and a Hispanic male are close in their opportunity, but I would say the Hispanic male has a better chance. I have no idea about a Native American. And I think Asians have nearly the same opportunity as a white, American male.

[EliSnow]

But if the customs and traditions of those Afican society deemed slave trade legal and appropriate in African culture for centuries, then why should other cultures not respect African values.

No, because those African societies made slaves of other African societies and tribes, who didn't have the choice to become slaves.

It's a ridiculous argument. Under this theory, if a society existed now that permitted slavery, we could get slaves from that country because that society makes it legal. Or in societies where women are treated as second class citizens (even to the point of mutilation), we should be able to treat those women as second hand citizens here as well. Hey, respect their values.

That's not the way it works. Should we also allow such people to engage in criminal conduct in our country if such conduct was legal in their country? No, we don't.

Moreover, the modern concept of human rights didn't exist during those time in any culture. So to "compensate" a group of people when the idea of freedom for all individuals (men, women, races etc) evolved relatively recently in history is ludicrious. How do you know something is wrong when the concept of modern freedom did not exist? It wasn't as if the idea of individual freedom came from Africa.

Again, not a good argument for similar reasons above. And the idea of human rights not existing in any country is bullshit. There was anti-slavery movements in many countries long before we got rid of it.

While I'm not making an argument for reparations, because I'm not, your arguments are not good ones for not paying reparations.

[mikeyboy]

he cant. he hasnt reached 100 posts yet. :flush:


You only need 10 posts to start a new thread.

[DonInNC]

You only need 10 posts to start a new thread.

Even if you were never a slave?

[DarkHippie]

If this was 1870, I would say yes. Too much time has past and the logistics of it would simply be outrageous due to mixed marriages, immigration, etc.

[RhinoinMN]

You only need 10 posts to start a new thread.

Yes, and he/she has already made one that ended up in locky before he/she reached 100 posts.

[TheMojoPin]

There isn't a realistic push or chance that this ever happens, so is there even any point to arguing about it? To bring it up as if Obama possibly becoming president somehow automatically makes it a likely or even feasable issue is asinine.

[patsopinion]

how bout instead of respirations we pull an Australia and send career criminals to Afghanistan or iraq and set up some sort of welfare system

[underdog]

To bring it up as if Obama possibly becoming president somehow automatically makes it a likely or even feasable issue is asinine.

I believe it was Earl who mentioned it today on the show that Obama would bring it back into the discussion.

[RhinoinMN]

how bout instead of respirations we pull an Australia and send career criminals to Afghanistan or iraq and set up some sort of welfare system

But they need help breathing too.

[TheMojoPin]

I believe it was Earl who mentioned it today on the show that Obama would bring it back into the discussion.

I know, that's what I was referring to. Earl completely pulled that out of his ass and it has absolutely zero basis in reality outside of Earl's halfassed political knowledge and Obama being black.

[furie]

Why should I have to pay for what my ancestors didn't do?

----------------
Now playing: Genesis - Supper's Ready (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/genesis/track/suppers+ready)
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

[TheMojoPin]

Why should I have to pay for what my ancestors didn't do?

----------------
Now playing: Genesis - Supper's Ready (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/genesis/track/suppers+ready)
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

Why should you pay for any number of things that have nothing to do with you that the government uses your money for on a daily basis?

[King Hippos Bandaid]

But they need help breathing too.

:lol: beat me to the respiratory joke

pat learn how to type before you are taken seriously

[furie]

Why should you pay for any number of things that have nothing to do with you that the government uses your money for on a daily basis?

paying taxes for services is not the same thing

----------------
Now playing: Queen - Hammer To Fall (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/queen/track/hammer+to+fall)
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

[DarkHippie]

There isn't a realistic push or chance that this ever happens, so is there even any point to arguing about it? To bring it up as if Obama possibly becoming president somehow automatically makes it a likely or even feasable issue is asinine.

Question, if there were reparations, would Obama be eligible? He is half black, and his father was an immigrant.

[TheMojoPin]

paying taxes for services is not the same thing

----------------
Now playing: Queen - Hammer To Fall (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/queen/track/hammer+to+fall)
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

That's not all you pay taxes for.

[Bowel]

No, because those African societies made slaves of other African societies and tribes, who didn't have the choice to become slaves.

It's a ridiculous argument. Under this theory, if a society existed now that permitted slavery, we could get slaves from that country because that society makes it legal. Or in societies where women are treated as second class citizens (even to the point of mutilation), we should be able to treat those women as second hand citizens here as well. Hey, respect their values.



Unless it was deemed illegal in that given society, then there would be cause for reparations. Civil rights and womens rights evolved over a period of time in United States history.


The ideals and values of this country took many, many generations .... it wasn't as if just because this is the United States of America that human rights as we know now is something to be taken for granted from its inception.

Again, not a good argument for similar reasons above. And the idea of human rights not existing in any country is bullshit. There was anti-slavery movements in many countries long before we got rid of it.

While I'm not making an argument for reparations, because I'm not, your arguments are not good ones for not paying reparations.



Even those countries that started anti-slavery movements still retained slavery via colonization which ended during the 1960's ... Again, the modern concept of human rights in the history of civilization is a relatively new global phenomemnon. Should all countries like Egypt or Italy need to compensate for past behavior that was the norm?

[furie]

That's not all you pay taxes for.

so enlighten me

[TheMojoPin]

Even those countries that started anti-slavery movements still retained slavery via colonization which ended during the 1960's

What? Saying slavery or colonization ended in the 1960's makes absolutely no sense.

And your argument is too huge. Again, nobody is seriously talking about reparations, and even if they were, it would be in regards to the United States' system of slavery against people who would eventually become U.S. citizens. The slavery of other countries or at other points in history are completely moot.

[TheMojoPin]

so enlighten me

I doubt I have to. The government basically does whatever it wants with our taxes. It's obvious to anyone that it doesn't only or even mostly go into services for the general public.

[furie]

I doubt I have to. The government basically does whatever it wants with our taxes. It's obvious to anyone that it doesn't only or even mostly go into services for the general public.

ok, so i don't really see what this has to do with my original statement

[EliSnow]

Unless it was deemed illegal in that given society, then there would be cause for reparations. Civil rights and womens rights evolved over a period of time in United States history.

First, this argument relies upon a mistaken notion that there were "countries" in Africa at the time, and the Africans who became slaves were part of the countries that legalized slavery. That's now how it was. You had tribes/groups of Africans that made slaves of other tribes. There were no laws, etc. that applied.

Second, why should the laws or norms of a foreign country dictate how we treat the membrs of that foreign country here. Answer is they don't. If it's legal to mutiliate a woman in another country, that doesn't make it legal to mutilate women from that country here. Nor does it explain why that foreign country would have to pay damages for what our country would do to those women.


The ideals and values of this country took many, many generations .... it wasn't as if just because this is the United States of America that human rights as we know now is something to be taken for granted from its inception.





Even those countries that started anti-slavery movements still retained slavery via colonization which ended during the 1960's ... Again, the modern concept of human rights in the history of civilization is a relatively new global phenomemnon. Should all countries like Egypt or Italy need to compensate for past behavior that was the norm?

We're talking about the U.S. federall government providing reparations for things that happened in the U.S. now. Your argument was that Africa countries, none of which existed hundreds of years ago should pay reparations for slavery in the US, because certain Africans and african tribes also benefitted from slavery.

It doesn't make sense.

[EliSnow]

What? Saying slavery or colonization ended in the 1960's makes absolutely no sense.

And your argument is too huge. Again, nobody is seriously talking about reparations, and even if they were, it would be in regards to the United States' system of slavery against people who would eventually become U.S. citizens. The slavery of other countries or at other points in history are completely moot.

Exactly.

[TheMojoPin]

ok, so i don't really see what this has to do with my original statement

Like I said, why should you pay for half of things the government uses our money to do? People talk about this if it happened, which it never will, like it would be this rare gigantic waste of money, as if the government NEVER pisses away millions of our dollars at least on a daily basis.

[mendyweiss]

http://www.geocities.com/imokproductions/GBindianpics.jpghttp://www.geocities.com/imokproductions/GBindianpics.jpg
SCHVARTZAS !!!!!

[Bowel]

What? Saying slavery or colonization ended in the 1960's makes absolutely no sense.

And your argument is too huge. Again, nobody is seriously talking about reparations, and even if they were, it would be in regards to the United States' system of slavery against people who would eventually become U.S. citizens. The slavery of other countries or at other points in history are completely moot.



I wrote that there was "slavery via colonization" in certain European countries that had anti-slavery movements in their country in response to EliSnow saying that other countries adopted the modern concept of human rights and that implementation of that ideology which I argued was not true.


For instance, France likes to stick their noses at the US for still allowing slavery but didn't mind keeping thier colonies in Indo-China or Africa until the 60's

Same case with the Brittish who abolished slavery in England before the US but still kept slavery going on India and African until the 50's and 60's.

[Dude!]

i think blacks should pay whites reparations
for sucking us dry with welfare and all other transfer payments
and for destroying our once beautiful cities
and for all the murders rapes and other crime they have inflicted on whites

[TheMojoPin]

For instance, France likes to stick their noses at the US for still allowing slavery but didn't mind keeping thier colonies in Indo-China or Africa until the 60's

Same case with the Brittish who abolished slavery in England before the US but still kept slavery going on India and African until the 50's and 60's.

Your theory that "colonization equals slavery" is completely flawed outside of being a melodramatic metaphor. The negatives of colonization can be expounded on all day, but it is simply not slavery as we're talking about here. Having colonies isn't the same as the slave trade. Not even close.

[IamPixie]

i think blacks should pay whites reparations
for sucking us dry with welfare and all other transfer payments
and for destroying our once beautiful cities
and for all the murders rapes and other crime they have inflicted on whites

you don't have an avatar or sig pic and are therefore, insignificant.

Also, I'll gladly take reparation from bowel. Here's how:

Step 1: Taze you in the balls
Step 2: Take your wallet
Step 3. Give you a wedgie

[TheMojoPin]

i think blacks should pay whites reparations
for sucking us dry with welfare and all other transfer payments
and for destroying our once beautiful cities
and for all the murders rapes and other crime they have inflicted on whites

What the fuck is a "transfer payment?" That made a dumb post even more magnificently stupid.

[ChrisBrown]

i think blacks should pay whites reparations
for sucking us dry with welfare and all other transfer payments
and for destroying our once beautiful cities
and for all the murders rapes and other crime they have inflicted on whites

Anthony?

[Bowel]

First, this argument relies upon a mistaken notion that there were "countries" in Africa at the time, and the Africans who became slaves were part of the countries that legalized slavery. That's now how it was. You had tribes/groups of Africans that made slaves of other tribes. There were no laws, etc. that applied.


I stand corected.

Second, why should the laws or norms of a foreign country dictate how we treat the membrs of that foreign country here. Answer is they don't. If it's legal to mutiliate a woman in another country, that doesn't make it legal to mutilate women from that country here. Nor does it explain why that foreign country would have to pay damages for what our country would do to those women.


Laws and norms of other countries shouldn't dictate the US. But there was no clear law against slave trade, women's rights, children's rights etc. These laws had to be created in a given society but in no way should they be taken for granted.



We're talking about the U.S. federall government providing reparations for things that happened in the U.S. now. Your argument was that Africa countries, none of which existed hundreds of years ago should pay reparations for slavery in the US, because certain Africans and african tribes also benefitted from slavery.

It doesn't make sense.


Granted African countries didn't exist during the time of slavery but which entity is responsible for slavery in the US to begin with: African tribes of the US government?

It's tradition that the losing tribe become made slaves and became a commodity for the winning tribesmen who sold them to slavery to the US. Absent of the modern concept of human rights, who's to say this practice is wrong? Does a human being inantely know that such a practice is wrong? While slave-owners in America greatly benefitted from such a practice are they not also a victim?


While it was true that the Brits tooks advantage of Indians, the Indian people were more of a victim of their caste system. Should the Brittish "owe" India for taking benefiting from their system.

[ChrisBrown]

i think blacks should pay whites reparations
for sucking us dry with welfare and all other transfer payments
and for destroying our once beautiful cities
and for all the murders rapes and other crime they have inflicted on whites

wait, I get it...irony, right?

[Bowel]

Your theory that "colonization equals slavery" is completely flawed outside of being a melodramatic metaphor. The negatives of colonization can be expounded on all day, but it is simply not slavery as we're talking about here. Having colonies isn't the same as the slave trade. Not even close.



So your saying that colonization in no way come close to slavery? :blink:


BTW ... the arguement wasn't that "colonies equals the slave trade" ... it was countries that supposedly adopted the values of human rights prior to the US (anti-slavery movement) did not even come close to modern value of human rights and freedom.

[DonInNC]

Again, nobody is seriously talking about reparations...

Not yet, but I'm waiting for the emai to be FWD:FWD:FWD:FWD'd to me any day now.

Seriously though, over the last few months I've had the pleasure of having some seroiusly stupid political conversations in bars and cabs with both black and white people. There are people on both sides of the issue that are convinced that reparations will be a priority in an Obama administration.

[IamPixie]

I like how you start two black themed threads yet when I post in both of them you refuse to respond to me. Most likely the only black person giving you input. In the great words of Ron Bennington: "Fuck you, fuckstick."

[Lunatic]

2 reasons why i say no.
1) a vast majority of "white" americans alive today don't have ancestors that benifitted in any way from slavery.
2) you cannot be enslaved against your will. america came about based on a belief of "Live Free or Die". If you dont have the balls to die for your own or your families freedom then suffer and shut up. slaves out numbered white slave owners by a large number and just sat around cry'n "Lordie Lordie".

[IamPixie]

2 reasons why i say no.
1) a vast majority of "white" americans alive today don't have ancestors that benifitted in any way from slavery.
2) you cannot be enslaved against your will. america came about based on a belief of "Live Free or Die". If you dont have the balls to die for your own or your families freedom then suffer and shut up. slaves out numbered white slave owners by a large number and just sat around cry'n "Lordie Lordie".

I really hate this thread.

[TheMojoPin]

you cannot be enslaved against your will. america came about based on a belief of "Live Free or Die". If you dont have the balls to die for your own or your families freedom then suffer and shut up. slaves out numbered white slave owners by a large number and just sat around cry'n "Lordie Lordie".

Unbelievable. Slaves were by and large intentionally kept from learning how to read or write and of course given no access to weapons. How were they supposed to coordinate ay kind of largescale revolt? Anything that wasn't a mass uprising would have been crushed almost instantly by local authorites since the slaves had no weapons and no way of coordinating a rebellion. And just because slaves outnumbered slave owners doesn't mean that non-slave owners wouldn't have put down a slave revolt. Tons of Americans didn't own slaves because they couldn't afford it, not because they didn't want to.

[Kit the Eskimo]

Would you say that a black male has the same opportunity as an Asian, Hispanic or Native American male to become rich in this country?

As a Native American...I would say that I have the same opportunities as everyone else. No more, no less. I didn't get to the position I'm in because of my race, I got here by studying and working hard.

[EliSnow]

Laws and norms of other countries shouldn't dictate the US. But there was no clear law against slave trade, women's rights, children's rights etc. These laws had to be created in a given society but in no way should they be taken for granted.

But that wasn't your argument. Your argument was that african countries should be the ones paying reparations for slavery on US soil because they benefited from slavery.






Granted African countries didn't exist during the time of slavery but which entity is responsible for slavery in the US to begin with: African tribes of the US government?

Both. If two people commit a crime, then both are responsible. Your original argument lays the blame (i.e. payment of reparations only on the africans.

It's tradition that the losing tribe become made slaves and became a commodity for the winning tribesmen who sold them to slavery to the US. Absent of the modern concept of human rights, who's to say this practice is wrong? Does a human being inantely know that such a practice is wrong? While slave-owners in America greatly benefitted from such a practice are they not also a victim?

This is more ridiculous than anything else you said. No they were not victims of slavery, they benefitted from it.

[Bowel]

I like how you start two black themed threads yet when I post in both of them you refuse to respond to me. Most likely the only black person giving you input. In the great words of Ron Bennington: "Fuck you, fuckstick."



Wow ... you're an egomaniac.


What post of yours in this thread should I respond to?

[IamPixie]

Wow ... you're an egomaniac.


You and your "labels".....

[ChrisTheCop]

As a Native American...I would say that I have the same opportunities as everyone else. No more, no less. I didn't get to the position I'm in because of my race, I got here by studying and working hard.

Amen.

And although slavery was of course an horrid practice by any standards,
and although racism still exists today, I stand by my point that if reparations are to be made,
they should be made only to those who were actually slaves.

These days, African-AMERICANS have the same opportunities as anyone to succeed.

[Bowel]

But that wasn't your argument. Your argument was that african countries should be the ones paying reparations for slavery on US soil because they benefited from slavery.



If reparations are to be made, it shouldn't be the US that owes it. Africans tribes/countries should step up and bear most of the responsibility. I'm just saying that the US was more of a victim of African traditions and practices rather than it instigator.



Both. If two people commit a crime, then both are responsible. Your original argument lays the blame (i.e. payment of reparations only on the africans.


But it wasn't a crime. If it wasn't for the Abolishionist Movement that occurred outside of Africa, slavery may still be a custom in many African societies today much like female genital mutilation.

[EliSnow]

If reparations are to be made, it shouldn't be the US that owes it. Africans tribes/countries should step up and bear most of the responsibility. I'm just saying that the US was more of a victim of African traditions and practices rather than it instigator.

.

That's idiotic.

Slaves were victims. Slaveowners and the governments that allowed slavery on US soil were perpetrators of the wrong committed. Any argument that the US was a victim is a complete an utter distortion of what happened.

And again, under this theory, the United States would be able to mutilate the genitals of african women who came from countries permitting that practice, and would be a victim of that practice.

[DolaMight]

if this motion passes does it become law or is forwarded to another legislative branch?

[Bowel]

That's idiotic.

Slaves were victims. Slaveowners and the governments that allowed slavery on US soil were perpetrators of the wrong committed. Any argument that the US was a victim is a complete an utter distortion of what happened.

And again, under this theory, the United States would be able to mutilate the genitals of african women who came from countries permitting that practice, and would be a victim of that practice.



But it was the US and other countries outside of Africa that deemed slavery unacceptable ... not the African people.

Africans were being sold into slavery during a time in world history where slavery was not considered wrong. You're assuming that anyone born should know inately that slavery is wrong.


And again, under this theory, the United States would be able to mutilate the genitals of african women who came from countries permitting that practice, and would be a victim of that practice.



What I'm arguing is that the movement against slavery and human rights occured in cultures outside of Africa.

Had these ideas and people who valued these ideas about individual liberty etc. in the US/Brittian then chances are today slavery, genital mutilation etc would be the norm in Africa. These practices would not be considered wrong because the ideas behind the modern human rights movement would not exist.


Who's taking the initiative to stop the practice of female genital mutilation in Afriac today? It ain't the tribes in Africa.

[9mileskid]

why shouldn't england have to pay the reparations since they owned the country when most of this all started.wheren't there more slaves brought here before the revolution and stayed and had families after arriving.
i blame england-earl
i blame the blacks-ronnie b

[TheMojoPin]

Bowel, do you honestly think post-colonial Africa is better off than it was pre-colonial?

Pretty much all of the major, continued regional strife in Asia, the Middle East and Africa and hell, even the Americas is the result of European colonialism and the destruction of regiona tribalism and the creation of arbitrary borders. I'm not saying these areas were all peaceful and sunshine before the Europeans showed up, but all the longstanding, large scale violent bullshit that keeps going on and on is pretty much thanks to the Europeans throwing everyone together and giving fuckall to how things were before they got there.

[EliSnow]

But it was the US and other countries outside of Africa that deemed slavery unacceptable ... not the African people.

This is irrelevant.

Africans were being sold into slavery during a time in world history where slavery was not considered wrong. You're assuming that anyone born should know inately that slavery is wrong.


No, that's not what I'm arguing. My argument is that if reparations were due for slavery in America, they woud be due from those that willingly participated and/or allowed the slave trade and slavery in America. That would include the US.

Your point is that the US and slaveowners are "victims" of african tradition. Bullshit. Victims don't willingly participate in something. If we're smart enough to deem slavery unacceptable, then we can't be victims of a tradition permitting slavery.

It's one of the tenets of our legal system. If two people commit a wrong, they are both responsible for the wrong. Regardless of whether one instigated it and the other carried it out. You're saying only the instigator should be held responsible. That idea is wrong under our legal system, and pretty much has always been.







Who's taking the initiative to stop the practice of female genital mutilation in Afriac today? It ain't the tribes in Africa.

That essentially proves my point. We're not "victims" to African tradition, and just because Africans permit it doesn't mean that we can or should

Under the argument you're making, we would be victims of that tradition if we allowed it here.

[Stankfoot]

" ..... Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease.”
GWB

[DolaMight]

If reparations somehow went to a national referendum on the exact dollar figure of a per person one time lump sum take it or leave it cheque, what would be the lowest per person payment amount the govt could get away with that would pass the 50/50 eligible voter threshold?

(Every black person is eligible and has a chance to vote regardless whether relatives were enslaved just to make administration easy, so about 13 million payments due)

Caveat being that once it's accepted the govt is legally absolved of the matter.

[Bowel]

Bowel, do you honestly think post-colonial Africa is better off than it was pre-colonial?

Pretty much all of the major, continued regional strife in Asia, the Middle East and Africa and hell, even the Americas is the result of European colonialism and the destruction of regiona tribalism and the creation of arbitrary borders. I'm not saying these areas were all peaceful and sunshine before the Europeans showed up, but all the longstanding, large scale violent bullshit that keeps going on and on is pretty much thanks to the Europeans throwing everyone together and giving fuckall to how things were before they got there.


I agree.

I believe the biggest problem with Africa is the one that EliSnow mentioned: That the "countries" in Africa (as well as the Middle East) were created by foreign powers.

Just as the Europeans had 2 major tribal wars in the beginning of the 20th century, Africans may need to fight it out to move forward.


When the Hutsis and the Tutsis were at each others throats in Rowanda, nobody ever thought of creating a separate state for these groups.


Whether pre-colonial and post-colonial Africa is better ... I couldn't say.

[TeeBone]

Reparations----WHY?

Let's not forget it was the North and not the South that wanted to consider blacks 3/5 of a man. Why, you ask? Simple, to disenfranchise blacks and not count the total population thereby given the South less representation and votes. Slavery in both the South AND the North (and don't kid yourself otherwise) was one of the darkest chapters in our nation's history. If I were black that would trouble me greatly, as should the 3/5 compromise. That being said----NO REPARATIONS!!!!!

[earthbrown]

The suffering of the slaves facilitated the ability of each and every african american today to achieve anything.

Had it not been for slavery I would bet that the african-american population of the country would be similar or lower than the population of asians. So each and every black person should be happy for slavery, and each and every white person too...see had it not been for the exact course of events that happened in history we would not exist.

K

[furie]

2) you cannot be enslaved against your will. america came about based on a belief of "Live Free or Die". If you dont have the balls to die for your own or your families freedom then suffer and shut up. slaves out numbered white slave owners by a large number and just sat around cry'n "Lordie Lordie".

wait; what?
I thought we got rid of shock posting

[ChrisBrown]

Bowel, do you honestly think post-colonial Africa is better off than it was pre-colonial?

Pretty much all of the major, continued regional strife in Asia, the Middle East and Africa and hell, even the Americas is the result of European colonialism and the destruction of regiona tribalism and the creation of arbitrary borders. I'm not saying these areas were all peaceful and sunshine before the Europeans showed up, but all the longstanding, large scale violent bullshit that keeps going on and on is pretty much thanks to the Europeans throwing everyone together and giving fuckall to how things were before they got there.

I think the key element that makes European colonialism so destructive is its technological superiority. Between the Industrial Revolution and WWI, Western Colonial powers could destroy whole societies without much resistance. There are examples of non-Western societies learning quickly to defend themselves (Japanese Navy beating the Russians in 1904-1905) but for the most part the West could exploit to their hearts' content. I don't think Europeans are any morally or ethically worse than any other group of people. There was war and strife before Western colonialism. There has been a tribal us vs. them mentality in humans throughout history and we have always been bastards to people who don't belong in our group. However, the mix of industrial capitalism and its need for resources, modern weapons, and a sense of Christian white man's burden has been especially lethal. I agree with MojoPin that the vast majority of the world's strife can be linked fairly directly to European colonialism.

[furie]

I like how you start two black themed threads yet when I post in both of them you refuse to respond to me. Most likely the only black person giving you input. In the great words of Ron Bennington: "Fuck you, fuckstick."

what's to respond to? you didn't ask him a question



----------------
Now playing: Helloween - Dr. Stein (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/helloween/track/dr.+stein)
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

[Coach]

Hell No!
Why? Here:
1) My family emigrated here from Ireland after slavery.
2) Northern Irish Catholics historically were usually sympathetic to the Slave's plight and aided escaped slaves. Others bought slaves and freed them with the understanding that the freed slaves would help raise and tend crops in exchange for education in reading, writing, and math.
3)Irish were enslaved and tormented by Africans long ago. The riches of the Celtic cultures were ransacked by the moors..
In my estimation, the black race owe every Irish and Scot descent about 1.5 million each.

[Bowel]

No, that's not what I'm arguing. My argument is that if reparations were due for slavery in America, they woud be due from those that willingly participated and/or allowed the slave trade and slavery in America. That would include the US.


But my point is that it was the people in the US that deemed slavery wrong. Again, slavery has long been accepted historically and isn't something that only Afriacns were a victim of ... Isrealites and European were victimized by foreign powers.

My point is that the change in attitude towards slavery and human rights developed primarily in the US and Britian against that history of acceptance of such practices in the world. I don't think that a slave owner could be guilty or owe reparations if the practice of slavery was the status quo in most parts of the world including in our own country.


I'm also saying that the human rights and abolision of slavery are not something to take for granted ... and took (and still takes) people to demand these values against the collective history of abuses in civilizations. Africans who were subjected to slavery were more victims of their tribal system and traditions than the slaveowners in the US just as the Dalits in India are victimized by their caste system. Slaveowners in the US basically saw great potential in obtaining slaves BUT the concept against slavery are products of Western Civilization that had yet to be innovated.

On the one hand, slaveowners in the US continued the practice of African slavery that has its roots in their culture. But on the other hand, it was the ideas of Western Civilization that freed them.


Your point is that the US and slaveowners are "victims" of african tradition. Bullshit. Victims don't willingly participate in something. If we're smart enough to deem slavery unacceptable, then we can't be victims of a tradition permitting slavery.

It's one of the tenets of our legal system. If two people commit a wrong, they are both responsible for the wrong. Regardless of whether one instigated it and the other carried it out. You're saying only the instigator should be held responsible. That idea is wrong under our legal system, and pretty much has always been.


I disagree.

Were men victims of believing that women were intellectually inferior back in the 1800's? If slavery was considered acceptable thoughout most of history, should all those who owned slaves be subjected to punishment because of an ideological shift that happened later in history?

You're taking the acceptance of modern human rights for granted as if all those back in early time should have naturally realized that slavery is wrong. re



[FONT="Arial"][SIZE="3"]That essentially proves my point. We're not "victims" to African tradition, and just because Africans permit it doesn't mean that we can or should

Under the argument you're making, we would be victims of that tradition if we allowed it here.



Again, how are we they suppose to know that slavery was wrong. Wouldn't you agree that people who grew up during those time are victims of a given society that accepted many human rights abuses. And it took the questioning of such practices by Abolitionists that revolutionized society.

[TheMojoPin]

It's amazing how some people respond with such vitriol to a topic that has abolutely zero chance of ever coming to pass.

[Coach]

It's amazing how some people respond with such vitriol to a topic that has abolutely zero chance of ever coming to pass.
I was in a history class at Rutgers, one of three whites in an otherwise all black class, was verbally assaulted by a woman of color on this issue during class, stated the same I did above. The professor, whom was also black, said I was right, and the class went apeshit. So I think I validated my response.

[TheMojoPin]

It's amazing how some people respond with such vitriol to a topic that has abolutely zero chance of ever coming to pass.

Seriously.

[Dude!]

It's amazing how some people respond with such vitriol to a topic that has abolutely zero chance of ever coming to pass.

that is naive

just 20 years ago nobody would have believed a man could legally marry a man
but now it is legal in california and elsewhere

a few judicial decisions, a couple of riots, and bang...reparations you will have

[Sinestro]

I haven't read the whole thread, but how about the Native Americans and all the broken promises from the U.S.

[TheMojoPin]

that is naive

just 20 years ago nobody would have believed a man could legally marry a man
but now it is legal in california and elsewhere

a few judicial decisions, a couple of riots, and bang...reparations you will have

Ridiculous comparison that makes absolutely no sense. And the latter scenario also makes no sense. What kind of "judicial decisions" are you talking about?

[furie]

It's amazing how some people respond with such vitriol to a topic that has abolutely zero chance of ever coming to pass.

you keep bringing that up. we know it's not going to pass. most of the shit that is talked about on this board is never going to happen. this is just a discussion.

[Dude!]

Ridiculous comparison that makes absolutely no sense. And the latter scenario also makes no sense. What kind of "judicial decisions" are you talking about?

i have no idea

all i know is that when groups want things done that elected legislatures won't do
somehow the judicial branch finds a way to legislate

eg gay marriage

no legislature elected by the people has made this happen...the judiciary has

[TheMojoPin]

you keep bringing that up. we know it's not going to pass. most of the shit that is talked about on this board is never going to happen. this is just a discussion.

You hear discussion, I hear "hey, this is a excuse for me to complain about black people thanks to this ridiculous scenario that'll never happen" from too many posts.

[TheMojoPin]

i have no idea

all i know is that when groups want things done that elected legislatures won't do
somehow the judicial branch finds a way to legislate

eg gay marriage

no legislature elected by the people has made this happen...the judiciary has

Except gay marriage isn't nearly as ridiculous as reparations, and nobody is going to rule in favor of such a thing.

Ye olde "gay marriage = a slippery slope" nonsense strikes again.

[furie]

You hear discussion, I hear "hey, this is a excuse for me to complain about black people thanks to this ridiculous scenario that'll never happen" from too many posts.

yes, but do you need to keep repeating it? do you think no one read your posts or do you need self-assurance?


----------------
Now playing: Pink Floyd - On The Turning Away (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/pink+floyd/track/on+the+turning+away)
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

[TheMojoPin]

yes, but do you need to keep repeating it? do you think no one read your posts or do you need self-assurance?

LOTS of self-assurance.

[NewYorkDragons80]

I know, that's what I was referring to. Earl completely pulled that out of his ass and it has absolutely zero basis in reality outside of Earl's halfassed political knowledge and Obama being black.
I haven't heard the replay yet, but while Obama wouldn't take the political risk of bringing slave reparations to the forefront, his presidency would absolutely bring more light to the discussion than currently exists.

[TheMojoPin]

I haven't heard the replay yet, but while Obama wouldn't take the political risk of bringing slave reparations to the forefront, his presidency would absolutely bring more light to the discussion than currently exists.

Something tells me the discussion would be more along these lines or radio/pundit/comedy fodder.

[DarkHippie]

The suffering of the slaves facilitated the ability of each and every african american today to achieve anything.

Had it not been for slavery I would bet that the african-american population of the country would be similar or lower than the population of asians. So each and every black person should be happy for slavery, and each and every white person too...see had it not been for the exact course of events that happened in history we would not exist.

K

I was gonna write something snarky here, but I kept reading it and saw a little bit of wisdom. You can't change the past, only the future. As awful as slavery and the eradication of native americans was, we cant do anything about it now. It is wrong to have people pay for the sins of their fathers, as the saying goes. Instead of focusing on past mistakes, we should focus on making sure that it never happens again.

And yes, some good came out of it, the way that the State of Israel came out of the Holocaust. That doesnt make it right.

[Brad_Rush]

that is naive

just 20 years ago nobody would have believed a man could legally marry a man
but now it is legal in california and elsewhere

a few judicial decisions, a couple of riots, and bang...reparations you will have

And then men can marry their dogs and it will be complete anarchy! Bill O'Reilly was right dammnit!!!

[DarkHippie]

And then men can marry their dogs and it will be complete anarchy! Bill O'Reilly was right dammnit!!!

I'm looking forward to marrying a sexy Labradoodle

[Brad_Rush]

I'm looking forward to marrying a sexy Labradoodle

I hear they're size-queens...

[DarkHippie]

I hear they're size-queens...

That's fine, I'm hung like a Great Dane

[NewYorkDragons80]

Something tells me the discussion would be more along these lines or radio/pundit/comedy fodder.
I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing if reparations are discussed, but I'm convinced the issue will be much bigger if Obama is elected. In fact, it would be even more polarizing than today. Those against reparations would argue that Obama proves they are unnecessary, while those for them would feel they have an advocate in the most powerful office in the world.

It highlights what I see as one of Obama's major hurdles if he wins. He has built up such a personality cult around him about a vague sense of hope that his supporters expect will expect a vast array of injustices to be righted. The problems facing the developing world will not be solved by one president. Gay rights won't be achieved by one president. This country won't be unified under one president. His message needs to be brought down to earth or he's going to set himself up for failure if he wins this election.
do you honestly think post-colonial Africa is better off than it was pre-colonial?
Africa's a victim of, among other things, its own geography. The difficult landscape and lack of usable ports prevented inter-regional trade and influence and prevented Africans from keeping up with Europe and Asia until the Age of Exploration came and ideas of racial superiority dominated the traders who finally did arrive.

So, Colonial Africa has brought about 10 generations of untold misery to date. However, if Congolese, for instance, fought for the same rights as Belgian citizens and remained a part of Belgium the way Canada is a part of Britain, they'd be light years ahead of where they are now. No civil wars, no dictatorship. Don't get me wrong, Belgians are to blame for 70% of the problem in the Congo. They killed half the people in the country in the late 1800s. They are responsible for less than a dozen college degrees at the time of independence. But did Mobutu create corruption or were kickbacks to your tribe a common practice before a member of the Ngbandi ever knew what color Europeans were?

[Bowel]

Africa's a victim of, among other things, its own geography. The difficult landscape and lack of usable ports prevented inter-regional trade and influence and prevented Africans from keeping up with Europe and Asia until the Age of Exploration came and ideas of racial superiority dominated the traders who finally did arrive.



I disagree.


I think it's the opposite. Africa is a continent that's abundant in natural resources. The basic needs (food, water, shelter) were met naturally and without much toil much like tropical islands. So there was little incentive to innovate.


Asia and Europe were not rich in natural resources and had to shape their environment to have basic needs met. And because of that, they had to innovate tools and structures to control their environment. For instance, in China, canal systems were innovated over 2000 years ago bercause of they were prone to massive flooding. Chinese architeture (emphasis on horizontal) was developed to adapted to its earthquake-prone environment. These kinds of inventions probably led their civilization to value and develop other inventions.

[TheMojoPin]

I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing if reparations are discussed, but I'm convinced the issue will be much bigger if Obama is elected. In fact, it would be even more polarizing than today. Those against reparations would argue that Obama proves they are unnecessary, while those for them would feel they have an advocate in the most powerful office in the world.

It highlights what I see as one of Obama's major hurdles if he wins. He has built up such a personality cult around him about a vague sense of hope that his supporters expect will expect a vast array of injustices to be righted. The problems facing the developing world will not be solved by one president. Gay rights won't be achieved by one president. This country won't be unified under one president. His message needs to be brought down to earth or he's going to set himself up for failure if he wins this election.

I just don't see the reparations issue as having any kind of real push or support to it. Maybe if this was 10-15 years ago when it seemed like a bigger deal, alright, but right now it doesn't seem like something that he needs to even touch on or that anyone of any significance or influence is going to run with if they expect to be taken seriously on anything else. There's a score of other "black issues" far more pressing and realistic that'll be brought up before somethin this could possibly gain any momentum. I simply don't see how this could be anything more than a fringe "movement" at this point.

Africa's a victim of, among other things, its own geography. The difficult landscape and lack of usable ports prevented inter-regional trade and influence and prevented Africans from keeping up with Europe and Asia until the Age of Exploration came and ideas of racial superiority dominated the traders who finally did arrive.

So, Colonial Africa has brought about 10 generations of untold misery to date. However, if Congolese, for instance, fought for the same rights as Belgian citizens and remained a part of Belgium the way Canada is a part of Britain, they'd be light years ahead of where they are now. No civil wars, no dictatorship. Don't get me wrong, Belgians are to blame for 70% of the problem in the Congo. They killed half the people in the country in the late 1800s. They are responsible for less than a dozen college degrees at the time of independence. But did Mobutu create corruption or were kickbacks to your tribe a common practice before a member of the Ngbandi ever knew what color Europeans were?

Like I said, I'm not saying the colonial territoris were all sunshine and lollipops before the European powers arrived, but things existed on a much more manageable scale. The colonial territories basically went through a crashcourse of European close quarters geopolitics in about a hundred years. That was a recipe of disaster. Nobody "creaed" corruption or violence, but the European post-colonial process magnified it and spread it and give it the settings to thrive in, plus the sudden technological evolution to ensure that it would just get worse.

[Bay Ridge Tim]

I support Caucasians United for Reparations and Emancipation (http://www.reparationsthecure.org/). In spirit, not necessarily monetarily.

[underdog]

It's amazing how some people respond with such vitriol to a topic that has abolutely zero chance of ever coming to pass.

And the amount of Angry White Guys is astonishing.

I really hate this thread.

I'm starting to agree with you.

[led37zep]

Judging by the Poll results we now have 6 black members.


We've finally done it boys! DIVERSITY NOW!!!!!!

[ChrisTheCop]

It's amazing how some people respond with such vitriol to a topic that has abolutely zero chance of ever coming to pass.

I consider myself a pretty verbose gentleman, but I must admit, I have never seen nor heard this word before, as far as I can recall.

When I saw it, I said, "why are people responding with old timey phonographs???"

So I looked it up.

Now I say, "Why are people responding with any of various sulfates of metals, such as ferrous sulfate, zinc sulfate, or copper sulfate???"

Unless of course, you meant the other definition.

My point is, congratulations on introducing me to a new word, which I will now interject into all my conversations this week, to make me look shhmaaaut.

[Serpico1103]

I agree.

I believe the biggest problem with Africa is the one that EliSnow mentioned: That the "countries" in Africa (as well as the Middle East) were created by foreign powers.

Just as the Europeans had 2 major tribal wars in the beginning of the 20th century, Africans may need to fight it out to move forward.


When the Hutsis and the Tutsis were at each others throats in Rowanda, nobody ever thought of creating a separate state for these groups.


Whether pre-colonial and post-colonial Africa is better ... I couldn't say.

Slavery within Africa was completely different than the what it became in America. Obviously in America a slave couldn't simply reintegrate back into society, he was black. In Africa, there was no rigid system like that. Europeans and Americans took advantage of Africa's resources and its people. To argue differently is idiotic.
Were there laws against killing humans? Slaves were property and could be killed by their master without recourse.
We allow the Indians to operate casinos tax free as a way of saying sorry about that whole genocide and nation stealing thing. But, atleast you don't pay taxes. Of course reparations is not a simple solution. But, to say that a black man has the same opportunity as a white man is incorrect. Do you believe that education counts for anything? Who do you think gets a better education, white kids or black kids? Do you think parenting counts for anything? Who is raised in more single parent homes?
Republicans will talk about how important the "family" is, one father and one mother, but than say its up to the individual to make something of their life. Than I guess the "family" is not that important.
Rambling, yes I know.

[Serpico1103]

I consider myself a pretty verbose gentleman, but I must admit, I have never seen nor heard this word before, as far as I can recall.

When I saw it, I said, "why are people responding with old timey phonographs???"

So I looked it up.

Now I say, "Why are people responding with any of various sulfates of metals, such as ferrous sulfate, zinc sulfate, or copper sulfate???"

Unless of course, you meant the other definition.

My point is, congratulations on introducing me to a new word, which I will now interject into all my conversations this week, to make me look shhmaaaut.

Not that an uncommon word. But nice to see you are open to learning.

[Sue_Bender]

What? Of course.

[NewYorkDragons80]

I think it's the opposite. Africa is a continent that's abundant in natural resources. The basic needs (food, water, shelter) were met naturally and without much toil much like tropical islands. So there was little incentive to innovate.
[cracks knuckles] Where to begin? It's been established that having natural resources is a curse, not a blessing. Name a country outside of the West with abundant natural resources that has both prosperity and freedom.

[Bowel]

[cracks knuckles] Where to begin? It's been established that having natural resources is a curse, not a blessing. Name a country outside of the West with abundant natural resources that has both prosperity and freedom.


You stated that "Africa was a victim of it's own geography" and "its geography and lack of usable ports prevented Africans from keeping up with Europe and Asia until the Age of exploration."


I was saying that the basic needs were met because of Africa's abundant resources. Oil, gold etc are not the resources I was refering to ... I was refering to the basic needs like water and food. The reason why there was no history of a complex farming system in Africa when compared to Europe and Asia was most likely Africa's naturally rich and abundant resources.


Africans did not need to be as innovated as the Europeans or Asians who come from regions in this world that were not abunddant in natural resources and therefore had to toil more.

[A.J.]

Why should you pay for any number of things that have nothing to do with you that the government uses your money for on a daily basis?

Oh, if only.

[RAAMONE]

the only thing that i dont get is...

why should I (a non slave owner) give some random black person (who was never a slave) money...makes no sense

if they were going to do something like that it should have been done right away

[EliSnow]

But my point is that it was the people in the US that deemed slavery wrong. Again, slavery has long been accepted historically and isn't something that only Afriacns were a victim of ... Isrealites and European were victimized by foreign powers.

My point is that the change in attitude towards slavery and human rights developed primarily in the US and Britian against that history of acceptance of such practices in the world. I don't think that a slave owner could be guilty or owe reparations if the practice of slavery was the status quo in most parts of the world including in our own country.


I'm also saying that the human rights and abolision of slavery are not something to take for granted ... and took (and still takes) people to demand these values against the collective history of abuses in civilizations. Africans who were subjected to slavery were more victims of their tribal system and traditions than the slaveowners in the US just as the Dalits in India are victimized by their caste system. Slaveowners in the US basically saw great potential in obtaining slaves BUT the concept against slavery are products of Western Civilization that had yet to be innovated.

On the one hand, slaveowners in the US continued the practice of African slavery that has its roots in their culture. But on the other hand, it was the ideas of Western Civilization that freed them.

None of this matters to your original argument. Your argument was,:

Slavery was a huge part of the economy for many African countries by the African people themselves. It's African countries that should pay the reparations.


So, your argument assumes that, if reparations are due, then it should come from the africans who benefitted from slavery. All of this talk about whether people appreciated whether slavery is wrong really goes to the question of whether reparations are due or not. However, your initial argument skipped that and assumed that reparations are due, and the burden should be on the african societies who benefitted from it.

In legal terms, your first argument goes to who should pay damages for a wrong. But these later arguments about who thought slavery was wrong, and when goes to culpability or liability. Your first post assumed liability/culpability, and made a judgment call on who should pay damages.

My point is that if there is moral culpability, which your argument assumed, african societies who benefitted and slaveowners, etc. who willingly participated in the captivity, murder, and violation of basic rights of slaves, share equal moral culpability, and thus, responsibilty for paying reparations.



I disagree.

Were men victims of believing that women were intellectually inferior back in the 1800's?

No, they weren't. The victims are people who suffered.

Men didn't suffer from this.

Under this theory, if a man rapes a woman in this country because in his culture such rape is legal, the man also is a victim. Guess what? He's not.



If slavery was considered acceptable thoughout most of history, should all those who owned slaves be subjected to punishment because of an ideological shift that happened later in history?

You're taking the acceptance of modern human rights for granted as if all those back in early time should have naturally realized that slavery is wrong.

Again, no I'm not. My argument is that your initial argument about reparations should come from African countries and not the US is faulty. That's all. You're the one bringing in arguments, that really go to whether reparations are due.

And whether someone has moral culpability or not, really doesn't go to whether the person is a victim. The person may not have moral culpability, but that doesn't mean the person is a victim.


Again, how are we they suppose to know that slavery was wrong. Wouldn't you agree that people who grew up during those time are victims of a given society that accepted many human rights abuses. And it took the questioning of such practices by Abolitionists that revolutionized society.

Again, per the above, this doesn't matter. This argument goest to the question of whether moral culpability exists leading to the need for reparations. It doesn't go to who should pay for reparations if there was such culpability, which is what your first post was about.

[NewYorkDragons80]

I was saying that the basic needs were met because of Africa's abundant resources. Oil, gold etc are not the resources I was refering to ... I was refering to the basic needs like water and food. The reason why there was no history of a complex farming system in Africa when compared to Europe and Asia was most likely Africa's naturally rich and abundant resources.


Africans did not need to be as innovated as the Europeans or Asians who come from regions in this world that were not abunddant in natural resources and therefore had to toil more.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/21/Africa_satellite_orthographic.jpg/300px-Africa_satellite_orthographic.jpg
Most of that green is dense forests which are extremely difficult to traverse. The brown is desert. Add to that the fact that most of the coasts are unusable for anything but cliff diving, and you have a very isolated continent. Based on the historical evidence I've read, innovation up until Columbus had a lot to do with borrowing ideas from cultures who have visited you or you've visited. If Africans couldn't find water and food, they would've thrown in the towel in 1,000,000 BC. But if you think their status as a culture and their ability to keep up with Europe and Asia is based on finding sustinence, then we'll have to agree to disagree.

[TjM]

I'm not even sure anyone in my family history owned a slave (Irish/Scotch) Most of my ancestors were laborors and maids

[Tazznum1]

I consider myself a pretty verbose gentleman, but I must admit, I have never seen nor heard this word before, as far as I can recall.

When I saw it, I said, "why are people responding with old timey phonographs???"

So I looked it up.

Now I say, "Why are people responding with any of various sulfates of metals, such as ferrous sulfate, zinc sulfate, or copper sulfate???"

Unless of course, you meant the other definition.

My point is, congratulations on introducing me to a new word, which I will now interject into all my conversations this week, to make me look shhmaaaut.



Garafalo used it about 10x in her unmasked. It was to the point of grating on me.

[KnoxHarrington]

Garafalo used it about 10x in her unmasked. It was to the point of grating on me.

"Vitriol" is actually very useful word when discussing political discourse now.

Another is "disingenous."

[Tazznum1]

I'm "over the moon" about those words.


Another saying I hate.


Anyway, just remember the 40 acres and the mule will be chopped up for all decedents. Then we'll be even steven. So then we can take back quotas and grants for blacks etc.

[Knowledged_one]

"Vitriol" is actually very useful word when discussing political discourse now.

Another is "disingenous."

We are being introduced to a cornocopia of new words

[Serpico1103]

I'm not even sure anyone in my family history owned a slave (Irish/Scotch) Most of my ancestors were laborors and maids

But, you live in a society that "benefited" from slavery. You share in those benefits, therefore you do owe something to those who suffered from slavery. If blacks were denied rights until very, very recently it means that whites benefited from less competition. So, every white person had more opportunities then they would have had if blacks were allowed access to the same opportunity.
The end of slavery was not the end of black oppression.

[Tazznum1]

I'd gladly sell my ancestors to be slaves here for my benefit to live in the US compared to Africa. But my ancestors came over at the turn of the century and worked their fingers to the bone for next to nothing. So I get no reparations and have to pay? Glad it will never happen.

[El Mudo]

Unbelievable. Slaves were by and large intentionally kept from learning how to read or write and of course given no access to weapons. How were they supposed to coordinate ay kind of largescale revolt? Anything that wasn't a mass uprising would have been crushed almost instantly by local authorites since the slaves had no weapons and no way of coordinating a rebellion. And just because slaves outnumbered slave owners doesn't mean that non-slave owners wouldn't have put down a slave revolt. Tons of Americans didn't own slaves because they couldn't afford it, not because they didn't want to.



Which is why every slave revolt attempted in this country failed miserably (see Nat Turner, or John Brown, or Denmark Vesey or hundreds of others). And slave uprisings are difficult to pull off...not only because of the lack of education/weapons, but coordination and even unity. You could probably count the number of slave revolts that have succeeded ANYWHERE on one hand. The only modern one I can think of that succeeded off the top of my head is Toussaint L'Ouverture in Haiti...I guess you could count the Amistad, but that was them overtaking a ship

And NOTHING scared slaveowners more than the concept of "servile insurrection", which is why even when Blacks started to serve in the Army of the Potomac and other Federal Armies, they still made it a point of putting white officers on trial for propagating "servile insurrection" (its why John Brown was hanged for "treason")

That's idiotic.

Slaves were victims. Slaveowners and the governments that allowed slavery on US soil were perpetrators of the wrong committed. Any argument that the US was a victim is a complete an utter distortion of what happened.

And again, under this theory, the United States would be able to mutilate the genitals of african women who came from countries permitting that practice, and would be a victim of that practice.


Completely agree...only I would add that there's NO ONE who can hide from being responsible for slavery and/or the slave trade. Its more than just a "southern" institution...hell...they were making so much money in Massachusetts of the Rum/slave trade, that they almost started the American Revolution YEARS before it happened when the British threatened to tax it

Reparations----WHY?

Let's not forget it was the North and not the South that wanted to consider blacks 3/5 of a man. Why, you ask? Simple, to disenfranchise blacks and not count the total population thereby given the South less representation and votes. Slavery in both the South AND the North (and don't kid yourself otherwise) was one of the darkest chapters in our nation's history. If I were black that would trouble me greatly, as should the 3/5 compromise. That being said----NO REPARATIONS!!!!!

Common misconception...the 3/5 compromise only said that 3/5 of the slave POPULATION would count for representation...it didn't make them "3/5 of a man"...kinda a "who cares" point by me but it irritates me when i hear it the other way


Someone brought up "40 Acres and a Mule"...what that refers to is Special Order 15 from General Sherman in 1865 in order to redistribute white lands to landless blacks, and it was revoked by President Johnson in that same year...there was never any government "promise" to blacks of reparations. That isn't to say the government ROYALLY messed up Reconstruction...they basically left 4 million people to wander the backroads with no jobs, no money, and no education....its no wonder that it took another hundred years for the Civil Rights movement to finally be effective


I think its safe to say that Reconstruction is probably the biggest screwup EVER perpetrated by the United States Government...I think personally its the darkest, most disappointing period in our entire history, and yes, i'm including the Great Depression in that.

[TjM]

But, you live in a society that "benefited" from slavery. You share in those benefits, therefore you do owe something to those who suffered from slavery. If blacks were denied rights until very, very recently it means that whites benefited from less competition. So, every white person had more opportunities then they would have had if blacks were allowed access to the same opportunity.
The end of slavery was not the end of black oppression.

No I don't owe anyone anything. I'm a middle class (And struggling to keep it that way) White guy who has never taken a ****ing handout in my life. I suppose it's a moot point because it will NEVER happen

[Dash77]

I say no... We shouldn't get reparations b/c African Americans of today have no connection to slaves except were black, but they should give money to the Black colleges since they were started from direct offspring on slaves.

[A.J.]

Judging by the Poll results we now have 6 black members.


We've finally done it boys! DIVERSITY NOW!!!!!!

Funkman is black?

[El Mudo]

Funkman is black?

Only where it counts

[Serpico1103]

No I don't owe anyone anything. I'm a middle class (And struggling to keep it that way) White guy who has never taken a ****ing handout in my life. I suppose it's a moot point because it will NEVER happen

You have taken hand outs before. Were you raised by wolves? Did you have a free public school education?
Nobody does anything without help.
This country would not be what it is today if it were not for slavery. You are enjoying the benefits of this country. Therefore you did benefit from slavery.
I am not saying there will be or should be reparations. But, to act like the day blacks were freed from slavery they should have just pulled themselves up by their boot straps and made something of themselves is childish and stupid.

[TjM]

You have taken hand outs before. Were you raised by wolves? Did you have a free public school education?
Nobody does anything without help.
This country would not be what it is today if it were not for slavery. You are enjoying the benefits of this country. Therefore you did benefit from slavery.
I am not saying there will be or should be reparations. But, to act like the day blacks were freed from slavery they should have just pulled themselves up by their boot straps and made something of themselves is childish and stupid.

I'm not acting that way. Something should have been done but it should have been done back then. Acting retroactivly is just foolish

[patrick187]

Cuba Gooding Jr got an Oscar. We're evan.

[EliSnow]

You have taken hand outs before. Were you raised by wolves? Did you have a free public school education?
Nobody does anything without help.
This country would not be what it is today if it were not for slavery. You are enjoying the benefits of this country. Therefore you did benefit from slavery.
I am not saying there will be or should be reparations. But, to act like the day blacks were freed from slavery they should have just pulled themselves up by their boot straps and made something of themselves is childish and stupid.

Under that rationale, today's black people also have benefitted from slavery. While it could be argued that through discrimination, such a benefit was less than what others have received, they would have still benefitted in the form of free education, and other government benefits, including welfare or affirmative action.

[EliSnow]

Funkman is black?

Only where it counts

Um, he should have that checked out by a medical professional.

[FUNKMAN]

they should find the top 100 money-gainers from slavery, drag their family's out of their houses and beat them senseless. then all their money should be stripped from their bank accounts and divided amongst the generations of slave family's

then onto the top 100 money-gainers from stealing the land from the american indian and do the same thing

then it will be off to the next set of 100

i'm sure our Ive League professors can figure out who the fuckers are

[comp_atkins]

hellz to the no!

think of the logicistics of that. its absurd.

[Serpico1103]

Under that rationale, today's black people also have benefitted from slavery. While it could be argued that through discrimination, such a benefit was less than what others have received, they would have still benefitted in the form of free education, and other government benefits, including welfare or affirmative action.

Yes, everyone in the country today benefited from slavery. People that move here today benefit from slavery. Without slavery we would not have been as prosperous and we may have failed as a nation.
However, blacks "earned" that benefit, while others did not. How long have we had affirmative action, welfare, equal education? Maybe after 400 years of those programs you can use them as proof of equalization.

[TheMojoPin]

I consider myself a pretty verbose gentleman, but I must admit, I have never seen nor heard this word before, as far as I can recall.

When I saw it, I said, "why are people responding with old timey phonographs???"

So I looked it up.

Now I say, "Why are people responding with any of various sulfates of metals, such as ferrous sulfate, zinc sulfate, or copper sulfate???"

Unless of course, you meant the other definition.

My point is, congratulations on introducing me to a new word, which I will now interject into all my conversations this week, to make me look shhmaaaut.

I love "vitriol." It sounds like a refreshing drink.

[EliSnow]

Yes, everyone in the country today benefited from slavery. People that move here today benefit from slavery. Without slavery we would not have been as prosperous and we may have failed as a nation.
However, blacks "earned" that benefit, while others did not. How long have we had affirmative action, welfare, equal education? Maybe after 400 years of those programs you can use them as proof of equalization.

I don't think we would need 400 years of those programs as equalization. You have to look at each potential recipient as a person, and not as a gestalt body. If Earl has received those benefits that come from slavery, then he should not be entitled to any reparation (or much less than otherwise) for what his ancestors went through. He's received benefits from the government that have mitigated his "damages." Whether he earned it or not, he's received benefits from slavery, and thus, would not be entitled to reparations.

Of course, all of this talk about what the US "owes" in legalistic concepts should also include statutes of limitations and other issues that would stop any lawsuit in its tracks. But I won't bore the thread any more.

Also, I disagree that we would have failed as a nation without slavery.

[TheMojoPin]

Gestalt =

http://www.oafe.net/yo/art/tf_dev13.jpg

Transformers taught me that one.

[EliSnow]

Gestalt =

http://www.oafe.net/yo/art/tf_dev13.jpg

Transformers taught me that one.

Hey, you're not the only one who knows interesting words.

I'm just waiting for my chances to use esprit de corps, schadenfreude, and ochre, plus a host of other words I learned after reading the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant.

[PhishHead]

Good job Mojo stealing someones stuff!

Gestalt may be one of my favorite words. Eli knows the way to my heart :wub:

[PhishHead]

Hey, you're not the only one who knows interesting words.

I'm just waiting for my chances to use esprit de corps, schadenfreude, and ochre, plus a host of other words I learned after reading the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant.

you didn't know ochre before that? I am severely disappointed in you good sir :(

[RAAMONE]

wrong thread

[EliSnow]

you didn't know ochre before that? I am severely disappointed in you good sir :(

I read the Thomas Covenant books and thus learned ochre somewhere between 14 and 16, so over 20 years ago.

[Serpico1103]

I don't think we would need 400 years of those programs as equalization. You have to look at each potential recipient as a person, and not as a gestalt body. If Earl has received those benefits that come from slavery, then he should not be entitled to any reparation (or much less than otherwise) for what his ancestors went through. He's received benefits from the government that have mitigated his "damages." Whether he earned it or not, he's received benefits from slavery, and thus, would not be entitled to reparations.

Of course, all of this talk about what the US "owes" in legalistic concepts should also include statutes of limitations and other issues that would stop any lawsuit in its tracks. But I won't bore the thread any more.

Also, I disagree that we would have failed as a nation without slavery.

Again, the logistics of reparations and whether they would really help benefits are beyond the scope of what I can/will discuss.
If Earl benefits from our society due to slavery, his ancestors earned that benefit. If a white person benefits from slavery, he did not earn that benefit, so he still owes a debt.
I just hate, HATE, hearing people with the attitude that once slaves were free they had the same opportunity to succeed as anyone else. There was still discrimination until very recently. And even today, a black person has an opportunity to succeed not the "same" opportunity.
Mr. Cumia has the attitude that if Obama becomes president that we have equality. That is incorrect. Obama is hyper-intelligent, he is charismatic, and good looking. Because he can succeed is not proof that everyone can. GW Bush, an idiot compared to Obama, with no charisma, or at least much less, was the president. That could be proof that as a white man it takes less to achieve the same level of success.
I don't want reparations, just honesty about how until VERY VERY recently we oppressed people, not just blacks, as a nation.

[PhishHead]

I read the Thomas Covenant books and thus learned ochre somewhere between 14 and 16, so over 20 years ago.

Okay, I am back to loving you again :)

[EliSnow]

I just hate, HATE, hearing people with the attitude that once slaves were free they had the same opportunity to succeed as anyone else. There was still discrimination until very recently. And even today, a black person has an opportunity to succeed not the "same" opportunity.
Mr. Cumia has the attitude that if Obama becomes president that we have equality. That is incorrect. Obama is hyper-intelligent, he is charismatic, and good looking. Because he can succeed is not proof that everyone can. GW Bush, an idiot compared to Obama, with no charisma, or at least much less, was the president. That could be proof that as a white man it takes less to achieve the same level of success.
I don't want reparations, just honesty about how until VERY VERY recently we oppressed people, not just blacks, as a nation.

I think I can agree with most if not all of that.

[ChrisTheCop]

No one is saying, scratch that, I am not saying that slavery wasnt bad, and that oppression of blacks didnt continue in different forms after they were freed. wow, I cant believe I had to type that. lol.
What I'm saying is that people, right now, here in America, in this time zone, are equal.
I went to school with black people, and I'm pretty sure theyve done as well as, if not better than, I have done.
Do they have obstacles? Yes. Some people are still prejudiced against the color of their skin.
Do they have every opportunity to overcome that obstacle? YES.
Handsome people, intelligent people, connected people, already rich people, have always and will always have an edge on the 'rest of us'.
But we live in a society that has achieved as level a playing field as youre gonna see.
There comes a time when you have to move on from the past, and live in the now.
Again, slavery was very bad for the people who had to suffer through it...vitriol even.
But if you didnt live through that time, on one side or the other, you shouldnt have to pay or be paid for those sins.

[Serpico1103]

No one is saying, scratch that, I am not saying that slavery wasnt bad, and that oppression of blacks didnt continue in different forms after they were freed. wow, I cant believe I had to type that. lol.
What I'm saying is that people, right now, here in America, in this time zone, are equal.
I went to school with black people, and I'm pretty sure theyve done as well as, if not better than, I have done.
Do they have obstacles? Yes. Some people are still prejudiced against the color of their skin.
Do they have every opportunity to overcome that obstacle? YES.
Handsome people, intelligent people, connected people, already rich people, have always and will always have an edge on the 'rest of us'.
But we live in a society that has achieved as level a playing field as youre gonna see.
There comes a time when you have to move on from the past, and live in the now.
Again, slavery was very bad for the people who had to suffer through it...vitriol even.
But if you didnt live through that time, on one side or the other, you shouldnt have to pay or be paid for those sins.
I can guarantee that there are people today, young people, living off of trust funds that were funded by money earned by slavery. Seems unfair, what to do about it is another question.
EVERYONE DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME OPPORTUNITY.
As adults, yes we can all go to school, work hard, and make ourselves better. The problem starts when we are children. All children do not have the same opportunity to make themselves better or to realize that they have a chance to make themselves better.
Today it is becoming more of an economic issue than a race issue, but the problem is a poor white person can put on a suit and "blend" with society, a poor black person, is still a black person in a suit. So it makes it tougher to avoid discrimination based on race than economics.

[ChrisTheCop]

Does that happen? Yes.
Is it the norm? NO!

As long as any group of people keeps thinking there's no reason to even try to better their economic situation, because hey--we have the crutch of slavery to fall back on--I suppose nothing will change for THEM. But I for one see many many successful people every day, of all races. If any of them had stayed home, afraid to be seen as just a black man in a suit, they would not have succeeded.

Yes, everyone DOES have the opportunity for a better future, some would just rather not take it, cause it's easier to just complain about the past.

[Sinestro]

then onto the top 100 money-gainers from stealing the land from the american indian and do the same thing



Testify brother!

[furie]

That's fine, I'm hung like a Great Dane

you've got a red dick?!

[DarkHippie]

you've got a red dick?!

and blue balls :(

[TheMojoPin]

Does that happen? Yes.
Is it the norm? NO!

We'll just have to agree to heartily disagree.

A much higher percentage of blacks are born into social/educational/financial/residential situations where they hae no option but so struggle much harder uphill to reach stations in life that comes easier for other social groupings, particuarly whites. Is that true for all blacks? Of course not, but the percentage of disparity due to circumstances based explicitly on race is much higher for blacks than any other race in this country. Residential segregation is the most blatant of these longstanding and ongoing practices that has absolutely no end in sight and is specifically designed to keep backs in shitter neighborhoods with less money, worse education, less access to quality healthcare and far less chances to excape. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residential_Segregation) These are cycles that have been going on for generations and are "designed" to continue indefinitely (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutionalized_discrimination). To say that everyone has the same opportunities in the face of this simply doesn't hold water. These systems are just as damaging to poor whites, too, but they're epitomized with just how far-reaching they've been in damaging black America for the better part of a century. This is the really damaging stuff...everyone feels satisifed that slavery being abolished and blacks being able to share the same public facilities or vote or ride anywhere they want on the bus has "fixed" things, but it's the mostly invisible stuff that does the most damage and is most far-reaching.

[Serpico1103]

Alot of doctors enter their father's practice, alot of lawyers enter their fathers firm, alot of firemen have uncles or relatives who helped them get the job, alot of cops have fathers, uncles, etc who helped them get the job and guide them, Hollywood is full of people who followed their parents into TV and film, the list goes on. These are all opportunities that were denied blacks until the last generation or so.
Very few people make it on their own. Reverse snobbery is very popular, bragging how far you have taken yourself. But, usually it is a myth. Donald Trump tries to act self-made, he was always rich, as a kid he went to work in a limo. Martha Stewart was a model who married into a family that owned publishing companies. GW Bush comes from a long line of powerful men. Rush Limbaugh's parents were both attorneys. Bill O'Reilly grew up middle class or better. Yet, all these people have the attitude that making it on your own is so easy in this society. They know nothing about making on their own. Take away the money, love, support, wisdom, and connections your parents gave you and then tell me how easy it is to make it.
The problem is, all children do not have the same opportunity to learn and see what the world can offer them. By the time we are adults it is too late. I think they should ban private schools. If rich kids were forced to go to public school maybe the schools would get better.

[ChrisTheCop]

I was born into a middle class white family.
We moved often as I was growing up, making it hard to make friends, or fit in.
My Dad didnt play catch with me because he was working 2 jobs during a recession.
I wore hand-me-downs from my brother AND 2 sisters.
I was goofy looking so I didnt have alot of girlfriends.
My parents got divorced when I was 10.
My stepmother was a bitch.
My grades in PUBLIC SCHOOL were shit, and I had to work my way thru COMMUNITY College.
I ended up getting a civil service job because I was basically unskilled labor.

Now, if I was black, I could blame my hardships on something that happened 200 years ago, but since I'm white I guess it's because I forgot to shake somebody's hand??!!

Cmon people. It's the 21st century. Stop looking backward and move forward.

[ChrisTheCop]

I thought double posts were a thing of the past too.
Perhaps I'm wrong all around.

[TheMojoPin]

I was born into a middle class white family.
We moved often as I was growing up, making it hard to make friends, or fit in.
My Dad didnt play catch with me because he was working 2 jobs during a recession.
I wore hand-me-downs from my brother AND 2 sisters.
I was goofy looking so I didnt have alot of girlfriends.
My parents got divorced when I was 10.
My stepmother was a bitch.
My grades in PUBLIC SCHOOL were shit, and I had to work my way thru COMMUNITY College.
I ended up getting a civil service job because I was basically unskilled labor.

Now, if I was black, I could blame my hardships on something that happened 200 years ago, but since I'm white I guess it's because I forgot to shake somebody's hand??!!

Cmon people. It's the 21st century. Stop looking backward and move forward.

What I posted about isn't in the past. It's happening right now. And honestly, your life doesn't even touch the generational, purposely constructed cycle of social and economic poverty we're talking about applying to a wide percentage of people. I'm not saying you're life was some cakewalk or dismissing it, but to put it out there as if it's comparable to the depths we're talking about really isn't realistic. I am honestly not saying that to be antagonistic. If you're ever open to it, this book is an incredibly well researched and laid out dissection of these problems, and it is incredibly sobering

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71Y6RB3E3JL.gif

[Serpico1103]

I was born into a middle class white family.
We moved often as I was growing up, making it hard to make friends, or fit in.
My Dad didnt play catch with me because he was working 2 jobs during a recession.
I wore hand-me-downs from my brother AND 2 sisters.
I was goofy looking so I didnt have alot of girlfriends.
My parents got divorced when I was 10.
My stepmother was a bitch.
My grades in PUBLIC SCHOOL were shit, and I had to work my way thru COMMUNITY College.
I ended up getting a civil service job because I was basically unskilled labor.

Now, if I was black, I could blame my hardships on something that happened 200 years ago, but since I'm white I guess it's because I forgot to shake somebody's hand??!!

Cmon people. It's the 21st century. Stop looking backward and move forward.
You are right, its the 21st century, by 8 years. So long ago was the 20th century where blacks could not vote, could not eat where there wanted, own homes where they wanted, ride in the train car they wanted, were being lynched, had to read signs that said, "whites only" everywhere. Oh, it was so long ago that 20th century.
"I know Grandpa you couldn't vote because you were a nigger, but get over it, that was the 20th century."
As "tough" as you see your struggle it is a life of luxury compared to what blacks of your father's generation went through. Again, the opportunity exists for people. It is that kids growing up without guidance, without help, never see these opportunities.
Yes, a kid in the ghetto can get good grades, can get into college, can stay out of trouble, can graduate and get a good job. But, the hurdles he faces are insurmountable compared to what a middle class white kid faces.
It seems that people who really changed their economic status for the better want to help others lift themselves up, while those who were born into their economic status think it is easy to lift yourself up.

[FUNKMAN]

Judging by the Poll results we now have 6 black members.


We've finally done it boys! DIVERSITY NOW!!!!!!

Funkman is black?

how did you see my poll entry?

[ChrisTheCop]

You are right, its the 21st century, by 8 years. So long ago was the 20th century where blacks could not vote, could not eat where there wanted, own homes where they wanted, ride in the train car they wanted, were being lynched, had to read signs that said, "whites only" everywhere. Oh, it was so long ago that 20th century.
"I know Grandpa you couldn't vote because you were a nigger, but get over it, that was the 20th century."
As "tough" as you see your struggle it is a life of luxury compared to what blacks of your father's generation went through. Again, the opportunity exists for people. It is that kids growing up without guidance, without help, never see these opportunities.
Yes, a kid in the ghetto can get good grades, can get into college, can stay out of trouble, can graduate and get a good job. But, the hurdles he faces are insurmountable compared to what a middle class white kid faces.
It seems that people who really changed their economic status for the better want to help others lift themselves up, while those who were born into their economic status think it is easy to lift yourself up.

Dude, I've come to the end of my argument. Never mind the fact that you failed to grasp where I was going with my list of troubles, You keep returning to the past when I implore you (or as Dave says 'employ you') to talk about NOW.
Again, I'm not saying that slavery wasnt evil. I'm not saying that the civil rights atrocities in our recent past werent inexcusable. What I'm saying is that for African Americans today to be talking about getting re-paid for what their ancestors whom theyve never met had to go through is ridiculous.

You say as "tough" as I saw my struggles, it is a life of luxury compared to what blacks of my father's generation had to go through. And although youre speaking once again about the past... I say to you that as "tough" as a black kid sees his struggles today, it is indeed a life of luxury compared to what their ancestors had to go through.

There comes a time in history when you have to pause, say thank God that chapter is over, and TURN THE PAGE. As long as you use the past as an excuse for your present, you are cheating yourself on a future that is any better.

Every time a jewish kid doesnt get into college (it happens!) does he get to say it's because of the holocaust? Every time an irish kid doesnt, does he get to say its because his ancestors didnt have enough potatoes, or were oppressed by the brits? American indians get to blame custer? etc etc etc...and you will say "ridiculous" to those examples, as I say to yours.

I'm off to read Mojo's book. He was right about No Country for Old Men afterall.

[PapaBear]

Funkman is black?

how did you see my pole entry?

Maybe it was your vanity. Is it really necessary to place a mirror in front of all of your conquests, Funk?

[Serpico1103]

Dude, I've come to the end of my argument. Never mind the fact that you failed to grasp where I was going with my list of troubles, You keep returning to the past when I implore you (or as Dave says 'employ you') to talk about NOW.
Again, I'm not saying that slavery wasnt evil. I'm not saying that the civil rights atrocities in our recent past werent inexcusable. What I'm saying is that for African Americans today to be talking about getting re-paid for what their ancestors whom theyve never met had to go through is ridiculous.

You say as "tough" as I saw my struggles, it is a life of luxury compared to what blacks of my father's generation had to go through. And although youre speaking once again about the past... I say to you that as "tough" as a black kid sees his struggles today, it is indeed a life of luxury compared to what their ancestors had to go through.

There comes a time in history when you have to pause, say thank God that chapter is over, and TURN THE PAGE. As long as you use the past as an excuse for your present, you are cheating yourself on a future that is any better.

Every time a jewish kid doesnt get into college (it happens!) does he get to say it's because of the holocaust? Every time an irish kid doesnt, does he get to say its because his ancestors didnt have enough potatoes, or were oppressed by the brits? American indians get to blame custer? etc etc etc...and you will say "ridiculous" to those examples, as I say to yours.

I'm off to read Mojo's book. He was right about No Country for Old Men afterall.

And you are a prime example of why we have such poor foreign relations in this country. Yes, Iraqis I know we helped fund Iran during its war with your country, but lets talk about NOW. Iraqis, I know the US helped Saddam obtain poison gas that he used against you, but lets talk about NOW.
I wonder why South American governments don't trust us now, I mean it has been a couple of years since we toppled an elected government. Lets talk about NOW.
Without the past as a frame of reference you can not discuss NOW.
If a burn down your house, will you move on the next day?
You are a simple silly man.

[A.J.]

how did you see my poll entry?

I peaked at your poll.

"View Poll Results".

[Yerdaddy]

The fact that reparations are brought up more by pissed off white people than pissed off black people says a lot.

[TheMojoPin]

The fact that reparations are brought up more by pissed off white people than pissed off black people says a lot.

Perfect.

[A.J.]

The fact that reparations are brought up more by pissed off white people than pissed off black people says a lot.

Where are the pissed off Native Americans, Hawaiians, and Eskimos in all of this?

[TheMojoPin]

Where are the pissed off Native Americans, Hawaiians, and Eskimos in all of this?

Dead, wanting everyone off of Hawaii, fictional.

[Serpico1103]

The fact that reparations are brought up more by pissed off white people than pissed off black people says a lot.

I am not for reparations.
What does say alot is that you think people should only care about issues that directly affect them.
Since, our elected officials have historically been almost 100% rich white males that would leave everyone else out in the cold.

[TheMojoPin]

I am not for reparations.
What does say alot is that you think people should only care about issues that directly affect them.
Since, our elected officials have historically been almost 100% rich white males that would leave everyone else out in the cold.

Wait...what?

What does any of that have to do with the post you replied to?

[K.C.]

Affirmative Action is in a sense, reparations....it's there to help repair the damage.

The short of the answer, though, is no...the government should not hand over a large sum of money, or as Earl literally wants, his 40 acres and a mule (what the hell's he going to do with a mule in Brooklyn?).

If people want to repair the damage of slavery, you re-invest in inner-city infrastructure and schools, as well as addressing rural poverty.

That'll repair more damage than a lump sum of money ever would.

[TheMojoPin]

Affirmative Action is in a sense, reparations....it's there to help repair the damage.

The short of the answer, though, is no...the government should not hand over a large sum of money, or as Earl literally wants, his 40 acres and a mule (what the hell's he going to do with a mule in Brooklyn?).

If people want to repair the damage of slavery, you re-invest in inner-city infrastructure and schools, as well as addressing rural poverty.

That'll repair more damage than a lump sum of money ever would.

QFT.

Though I do like Ron's 40 acres and a dolphin idea. That's a pretty sweet deal.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Money by itself doesn't heal wounds and the idea that it does is ludicrous and infantilizing at the very best. All it does is breed deeper resentment on both sides while broadcasting false notions of entitlement favoring one side over the other. We saw how well the whole notion of reparations worked out for the Germans in the 1920's.

[topless_mike]

if this was 1870, yes.
nowadays, no.

[Serpico1103]

Wait...what?

What does any of that have to do with the post you replied to?

The post seemed to be implying that people should only be concerned with issues that directly affect them, i.e. Whites should not be concerned with reparations because it was blacks who suffered slavery.
Since most of this country is still white, it follows that every issue should have more whites talking about it than any other group anyway.
It is not a "white guilt" thing.
The purpose of this society is to perpetuate itself. Slaves were freed to protect the union, blacks were given legal equality to protect the nation, worker's rights were recognized to protect the nation. Striving to ensure that people have an equal opportunity to succeed will protect the nation. When you have an economically disparate nation, there is turmoil which may led to revolution.

[ChrisTheCop]

Wait...what?

What does any of that have to do with the post you replied to?

THHAAaaaank you!!! That should be said after most of his posts in this thread.

And, you can tell when someone's argument loses steam when they begin
with personal attacks.

Serpico, I'm not saying you havent made some interesting points, I'm just saying I disagree with them.
That's kind of what America is about, white, black or simple and silly, everyone gets their say.

[threepoundtrigger]

If anything, I think that they owe us something.

[ChrisTheCop]

if this was 1870, yes.
nowadays, no.

My point exactly.
If you were a slave, you get reparations.
If not, sadly, it's too late.

[ralphbxny]

Nope. No one is paying the Indians from the Caribean Islands from the people whos lands were taken and people who were killed from there.

[Serpico1103]

THHAAaaaank you!!! That should be said after most of his posts in this thread.

And, you can tell when someone's argument loses steam when they begin
with personal attacks.
You can tell how intelligent a person is when they can not comprehend a simple post.
His post- more whites complain about reparations
My post- why should whites not complain about reparations
Your post- DUH?

[ChrisTheCop]

blah blah blah, waah waah waah

I tried to have a discussion with you. Thats what we do here at RonFez.net.
I even said youve made some good points (i was being kind).
But when you see that I'm making sense,
you hide behind weak insults.

Good day sir.

[Serpico1103]

I tried to have a discussion with you. Thats what we do here at RonFez.net.
I even said youve made some good points (i was being kind).
But when you see that I'm making sense,
you hide behind weak insults.

Good day sir.

Changing my post? Seems beneath a RonFez.net member.
Trust me, I never saw that you were making sense.
Your point is the history means nothing, every day is a fresh start.
My point is that is oversimplifying the situation. The past bleeds over into the present.
It is unrealistic to ask people to forget the past and work only in the present.
What happened in your childhood affects you, what happened to your parents in their childhood affected how they raised you, etc.
You must understand the context of the problem to solve the problem.
Wah Wah Blah Blah.
Oink oink.

[ChrisTheCop]

http://img239.imageshack.us/img239/6084/hairafterwr2.jpg
I SAID GOOD DAY!!
YOU GET NOTHING!!! YOU LOSE!!!!!

[TheMojoPin]

The post seemed to be implying that people should only be concerned with issues that directly affect them, i.e. Whites should not be concerned with reparations because it was blacks who suffered slavery.
Since most of this country is still white, it follows that every issue should have more whites talking about it than any other group anyway.
It is not a "white guilt" thing.
The purpose of this society is to perpetuate itself. Slaves were freed to protect the union, blacks were given legal equality to protect the nation, worker's rights were recognized to protect the nation. Striving to ensure that people have an equal opportunity to succeed will protect the nation. When you have an economically disparate nation, there is turmoil which may led to revolution.

His post was pointing out the irony of how most of the people complaining about or bringing up the issue are the white people most against it. They're complaining about a "problem" that they're scared of or angry at that they themselves are perpetuating as an issue as opposed to the people they're mad at for supposedly demanding reparations. It had absolutely nothing to do with the tangents you pulled out of nowhere.

[Serpico1103]

His post was pointing out the irony of how most of the people complaining about or bringing up the issue are the white people most against it. They're complaining about a "problem" that they're scared of or angry at that they themselves are perpetuating as an issue as opposed to the people they're mad at for supposedly demanding reparations. It had absolutely nothing to do with the tangents you pulled out of nowhere.

My bad

[ChrisTheCop]

On June 19, 1862, Congress prohibited slavery in United States territories, thus opposing the 1857 opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in the Dred Scott Case that Congress was powerless to regulate slavery in U.S. territories.

Just an interesting side note; not meant to spark any arguments.

[Bowel]

My point is that if there is moral culpability, which your argument assumed, african societies who benefitted and slaveowners, etc. who willingly participated in the captivity, murder, and violation of basic rights of slaves, share equal moral culpability, and thus, responsibilty for paying reparations.


OK ... then if reparations are due, the culpability of the African slave trade lies in the hands of African societies/Nations.

Native American tribes also subjected losing tribes to slavery and sold them to the early American settlers but shortly later opposed the practice and consequently weren't subjected to the scale of slavery that was inflicted upon African people. The early American settlers didn't actively seek to chain up people of other countries. It was the customs and traditions of the African people which created the African slave trade. There was no other culture in the world that used its people as commodity in the way African societies did.

The values which deemed slavery morally wrong had yet to fully mature in any culture during that time, including American/European societies. Absent of a logical and rational arguement against such practice that was able to transform the morals of a given society, slavery continued in one form or another as it had throughout most of civilization's history.

American and European are not born with moral superiority and are no different than their African counterparts. They were just as susceptible as their African counterparts to "backward" thinking, traditions and practices of their ancestors. The African slave trade was introduced by African societies and was not invented by the early Americans.

Certainly the seeds of freedom and individual liberty were sown during that time but took several generations to mature and be accepted within a given society. It's illogical to take the concept of "All men are created equal" for granted .... it goes against over 5,000 years of customs and traditions in all cultures. Slavery was an accepted practice in most if not all corners of the world during that time. I would also argue that the concept of "All men are created equal" was just as important as the invention of the wheel. Had philosophers like Locke, Dewey, Hobbes etc. .... and even Confucius who inspired many philosophical writers during the Age of Enlightenment not existed, the moral values that are accepted and practiced today would not be part of our current value system or would have come later in history.



No, they weren't. The victims are people who suffered.

Men didn't suffer from this.

Under this theory, if a man rapes a woman in this country because in his culture such rape is legal, the man also is a victim. Guess what? He's not.

And whether someone has moral culpability or not, really doesn't go to whether the person is a victim. The person may not have moral culpability, but that doesn't mean the person is a victim.



Again, What I'm arguing is that human beings are not born with a set of moral values that would prevent individuals or cultures to adopt backward ideology. European, Asian and African people in their histories have all suffered because of the lack of rational and logical ideas that was able to transform the values of their society. If these transformative ideas didn't exist, people then become a victim of their social system.

For instance, if a newly discovered tribe in the Amozon that had no contact with the outside world practiced ritualistic rape as part of their culture, are they victims of their cultural values? If not, then should the entire society that accepts and participated in ritualistic rape be jailed or punished by an outside civilization with a different value system or should they be given the opportunity to understand and accept the values of the rest of the world?

[EliSnow]

OK ... then if reparations are due, the culpability of the African slave trade lies in the hands of African societies/Nations.

Native American tribes also subjected losing tribes to slavery and sold them to the early American settlers but shortly later opposed the practice and consequently weren't subjected to the scale of slavery that was inflicted upon African people. The early American settlers didn't actively seek to chain up people of other countries. It was the customs and traditions of the African people which created the African slave trade. There was no other culture in the world that used its people as commodity in the way African societies did.

The values which deemed slavery morally wrong had yet to fully mature in any culture during that time, including American/European societies. Absent of a logical and rational arguement against such practice that was able to transform the morals of a given society, slavery continued in one form or another as it had throughout most of civilization's history.

American and European are not born with moral superiority and are no different than their African counterparts. They were just as susceptible as their African counterparts to "backward" thinking, traditions and practices of their ancestors. The African slave trade was introduced by African societies and was not invented by the early Americans.

So because african societies allegedly started the practice of enslaving africans, they are the only ones with culpability. And the american slaverowners who participated in the process, have no culpability?

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Again using a legal comparison, if one person creates a plan to kidnap a person, and does so alone and sells them to another, who keeps that person in captivity, under our system, both are equally culpable. Because all made the free choice to take part in the action.

So, if the african societies are culpable so are american slaveowners. While American slaveowners weren't the ones who placed africans into slavery, they sure as hell kept them in slavery. And they certainly placed into slavery any offspring of slaves that were born in this country. That makes them as equally culpable as the people responsible for abducting the person and placing them in chains.

Any other thought process is antithetical to our justice system.



Certainly the seeds of freedom and individual liberty were sown during that time but took several generations to mature and be accepted within a given society. It's illogical to take the concept of "All men are created equal" for granted .... it goes against over 5,000 years of customs and traditions in all cultures. Slavery was an accepted practice in most if not all corners of the world during that time. I would also argue that the concept of "All men are created equal" was just as important as the invention of the wheel. Had philosophers like Locke, Dewey, Hobbes etc. .... and even Confucius who inspired many philosophical writers during the Age of Enlightenment not existed, the moral values that are accepted and practiced today would not be part of our current value system or would have come later in history.

Again, What I'm arguing is that human beings are not born with a set of moral values that would prevent individuals or cultures to adopt backward ideology. European, Asian and African people in their histories have all suffered because of the lack of rational and logical ideas that was able to transform the values of their society. If these transformative ideas didn't exist, people then become a victim of their social system.


For instance, if a newly discovered tribe in the Amozon that had no contact with the outside world practiced ritualistic rape as part of their culture, are they victims of their cultural values? If not, then should the entire society that accepts and participated in ritualistic rape be jailed or punished by an outside civilization with a different value system or should they be given the opportunity to understand and accept the values of the rest of the world?

Again, this goes to whether we could say whether african societies, slaveowners, and others that took part in slavery were morally culpable given the values of society in africa and america at the tiem.

Your orignal argument said that african societies are the only ones culpable for slavery in the US. And my point is that if the africans societies are culpable so are slaveowners and others.

That's why I said your initial argument was not a good one. If you want to make the above arguments, go ahead, but say that no one should be held culpable or pay reparations.

Also, you keep saying essentialy that people that engage in these practices are victims of their systems because they don't realize that their ways are immoral, etc. You really should stop using the word "victim," and choose some other word.

The victims are those whose basic human rights, such as life, liberty, etc. were infringed by others who acted of their own free will. As I said before there is a difference between someone who isn't morally culpable of his actions because he didn't couldn't appreciate his actions, and a victim. You keep equating the two. Using the word victim with a slaveowner or rapist is ridiculous.

[TheMojoPin]

Not to justify the slavery in Africa, but it was radically different than the European/Arab commercial slave trade. The slaves there usually were claimed in inter-tribal warfare or in negotiations to keep the peace, and typically the slaves ultimately earned their freedom. Any children born to the slaves were almost always born as free citizens. Again, not justifying it, but to compare it to the commercial slave trade isn't really applicable.

[Bowel]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/21/Africa_satellite_orthographic.jpg/300px-Africa_satellite_orthographic.jpg
Most of that green is dense forests which are extremely difficult to traverse. The brown is desert. Add to that the fact that most of the coasts are unusable for anything but cliff diving, and you have a very isolated continent. Based on the historical evidence I've read, innovation up until Columbus had a lot to do with borrowing ideas from cultures who have visited you or you've visited. If Africans couldn't find water and food, they would've thrown in the towel in 1,000,000 BC. But if you think their status as a culture and their ability to keep up with Europe and Asia is based on finding sustinence, then we'll have to agree to disagree.



I was saying that early innovations by a culture was inspired by meeting the basic needs for survival of that culture. That process of innovating to meet basic needs bled to other aspects of life. The domestication of animals and agriculture seemed to happen organically in cultures that needed to shaped their environment for survival. This led to the invention of tools and structures for agriculture that gave birth to metallurgy which gave birth to weponry and other innovations. The absence of the domestication of animals and argriculture in Africa is most likely attributed to the rich natural resources that was able to give Africans the ability to survive without needing to shape their environment.


I brought up China because China was one of the most isolated of the great civilizations early in its history. China is surrounded by desert and mountains from other major civilizations and were forced to innovate early in its history in order to survive. The silk roads came about when travellers from other civilizations discovered Chinese products and goods. China would only exchange their goods for gold and silver because they deemed foreign products to be "barbaric." In fact apart from Buddhism, it was China's refusal to accept innovations from other civilizations that led them to become stagnant after the 1500's.

[Bowel]

So because african societies allegedly started the practice of enslaving africans, they are the only ones with culpability. And the american slaverowners who participated in the process, have no culpability?

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Again using a legal comparison, if one person creates a plan to kidnap a person, and does so alone and sells them to another, who keeps that person in captivity, under our system, both are equally culpable. Because all made the free choice to take part in the action.

So, if the african societies are culpable so are american slaveowners. While American slaveowners weren't the ones who placed africans into slavery, they sure as hell kept them in slavery. And they certainly placed into slavery any offspring of slaves that were born in this country. That makes them as equally culpable as the people responsible for abducting the person and placing them in chains.

Any other thought process is antithetical to our justice system.



Absent of laws or moral guidline against such practices, there are no laws being violated.


The origins of the African slave trade was not created by the early Americans. Culpability by slaveowners would come after laws against slavery have been established.


Retroactive or Ex Post Facto laws should be argued and depends how well each side states their case to determine if punishment or compensation should be given but shouldn't be taken as a given that there's culpability.



Your orignal argument said that african societies are the only ones culpable for slavery in the US. And my point is that if the africans societies are culpable so are slaveowners and others.

That's why I said your initial argument was not a good one. If you want to make the above arguments, go ahead, but say that no one should be held culpable or pay reparations.

Also, you keep saying essentialy that people that engage in these practices are victims of their systems because they don't realize that their ways are immoral, etc. You really should stop using the word "victim," and choose some other word.

The victims are those whose basic human rights, such as life, liberty, etc. were infringed by others who acted of their own free will. As I said before there is a difference between someone who isn't morally culpable of his actions because he didn't couldn't appreciate his actions, and a victim. You keep equating the two. Using the word victim with a slaveowner or rapist is ridiculous.



I agree that my original statement assumes that reparations are to be made to African-Americans in this country and I should have qualified it with an "if."


As far as the use of the word "victim" in regards to people who violate the rights of others without having being given the opportunity of obtaining moral values ... I would say that there's a degree of victimization that's not equal to the person(s) who was being violated but are victims nonetheless.

[EliSnow]

Absent of laws or moral guidline against such practices, there are no laws being violated.


The origins of the African slave trade was not created by the early Americans. Culpability by slaveowners would come after laws against slavery have been established.



But there were no laws applying to the africans either. So if slaveowners don't have culpability for this reason, neither do the africans participating in it.

Your original argument said they should pay. By conceding they should pay, you essentially concede that the slaveowners should pay. Because if the defense for slaveowners is that both actual law and morals at the time permitted slavery, that defense works for africans taking part in slavery as well. If the africans can't have that defense, then neither can the slaveoweners.

That's why I said your initial argument wasn't good.


Retroactive or Ex Post Facto laws should be argued and depends how well each side states their case to determine if punishment or compensation should be given but shouldn't be taken as a given that there's culpability.

Without culpability/liability, there's no punishment or compensation due. The laws against retroactive laws stops the finding of culpability/liability altogether, and without it, there's no damages.

[EliSnow]

I agree that my original statement assumes that reparations are to be made to African-Americans in this country and I should have qualified it with an "if."



That still wouldn't have corrected the flaw in your position. If african societies are to pay reparation, then slaveowners are too.

If slaveowners dont' have to pay reparation because they don't have culpability, neither do the african societies. There's no reason to distinguish the two.

You should never have brought up the african societies at all, and should have just made the other morals/values arguments that you made later.

[STC-Dub]

Reperations is a nice idea but there are no slave owners left, and a large portion of current American's ancestors came over after slavery was abolished. Why should I be held respooncible for something that happened in this country when my realtives were on another continent?

[Bowel]

That still wouldn't have corrected the flaw in your position. If african societies are to pay reparation, then slaveowners are too.

If slaveowners dont' have to pay reparation because they don't have culpability, neither do the african societies. There's no reason to distinguish the two.

You should never have brought up the african societies at all, and should have just made the other morals/values arguments that you made later.




If I had to make an argument for reparations, I would hold nations in Africa responsible for these reasons:

- Both Africans and Americans are exempt on moral grounds because both those values and ideas that would have prevented slavery didn't exist.

- The act of trading Africans as commodities and the origin of this trading system was created by the African tribes/societies/nations. And it was the actions by these Africans that instigated the African slave system.

[EliSnow]

If I had to make an argument for reparations, I would hold nations in Africa responsible for these reasons:

- Both Africans and Americans are exempt on moral grounds because both those values and ideas that would have prevented slavery didn't exist.



This is the worse argument for reparations I've ever seen. If they are "exempt" then they don't have to pay reparations.

- The act of trading Africans as commodities and the origin of this trading system was created by the African tribes/societies/nations. And it was the actions by these Africans that instigated the African slave system.

Even if true, as I frequently said before, that doesn't matter. If a wrongful act creating damages/punishment has occurred, then the person creating/instigating a wrongful act has as much culpability as one who wilingly joined in that wrongful act later. It's not a vaild distinction that would hold up anywhere.

[Bowel]

This is the worse argument for reparations I've ever seen. If they are "exempt" then they don't have to pay reparations.



I was saying that they are exempt on moral grounds alone.



Even if true, as I frequently said before, that doesn't matter. If a wrongful act creating damages/punishment has occurred, then the person creating/instigating a wrongful act has as much culpability as one who wilingly joined in that wrongful act later. It's not a vaild distinction that would hold up anywhere.


I'm arguing as if this were a debate class and I was given the assignment to argue for reparations.


Since neither the Africans or Americans are not morally culpable for the African slave trade, I would argue that the burden of reparations lies in the hands of the Africans who originated the scheme and influenced other cultures to adopt these practices.


The African slave trade was like crack-cocaine to the white man. :smoke:

[EliSnow]

I was saying that they are exempt on moral grounds alone.

It siill isn't a argument for reparations. It's an argument supporting why africans shouldn't have to pay reparations.






I'm arguing as if this were a debate class and I was given the assignment to argue for reparations.

And you made a bad argument. Which is what my original point was.

And no one gave you that "assignment." Nor was there ever an issue as to whether africans should pay reparations. The title of this thread and of the poll is, should african-americans receive reparations. You said hell no.

and you supported that opinion with an argument that africans should pay reparations not Americans. You should have just made the argument african americans aren't entitled to reparations from anyone.


Since neither the Africans or Americans are not morally culpable for the African slave trade, I would argue that the burden of reparations lies in the hands of the Africans who originated the scheme and influenced other cultures to adopt these practices.

And it's a bad argument since, unlike the prohibition of slavery (according to you), it's a long held value that a person freely participating in a wrongful act originated/planned/instigated by another is as culpable as the person who planned/originated/instigated the wrongful act.

So again, your initial argument is not a good argument as to why african americans should not receive reparations.

[Bowel]

It siill isn't a argument for reparations. It's an argument supporting why africans shouldn't have to pay reparations.


Both Africans and Americans shouldn't have to pay on marl grounds.



And you made a bad argument. Which is what my original point was.

And no one gave you that "assignment." Nor was there ever an issue as to whether africans should pay reparations. The title of this thread and of the poll is, should african-americans receive reparations. You said hell no.

and you supported that opinion with an argument that africans should pay reparations not Americans. You should have just made the argument african americans aren't entitled to reparations from anyone.



I already admitted that I should have qualified my first post with an "if" and not assume that reparations are to made. I should have clarified the first post that if reparations are to be made, it should be done by the African countries.


No one had to give me the "assignment" but I was just posting about something that I heard on the show which is why I registered to this message board in the first place.



And it's a bad argument since, unlike the prohibition of slavery, it's a long held value that a person freely participating in a wrongful act originated/planned/instigated by another is as culpable as the person who planned/originated/instigated the wrongful act.

So again, your initial argument is not a good argument as to why the US should not pay reparations.



But I'm arguing that slavery wasn't deemed wrongful and therefore the US and Africa shouldn't be punished for participating in the African slave trade on moral grounds.


But since it was the Africans who came up with this scheme and influenced the Americans who did not have a mature value system against the practice of slavery. And it was the people in the US who rose up against the practice of African slave trade after having been influenced by this African tradition.

[TheMojoPin]

But since it was the Africans who came up with this scheme and influenced the Americans who did not have a mature value system against the practice of slavery.

Completely false.

[EliSnow]

I already admitted that I should have qualified my first post with an "if" and not assume that reparations are to made. I should have clarified the first post that if reparations are to be made, it should be done by the African countries.

And as I already said, it wouldn't change the flaw in your argument. If Africans have to pay, so do slaveowners.


No one had to give me the "assignment" but I was just posting about something that I heard on the show which is why I registered to this message board in the first place.

That's my point. You didn't get an assignment to argue for reparations. You heard an issue and wanted to debate. You said "hell no" to african-americans receiving reparations.

And the reasons why, well if they do get reparations, it should be from african nations. So the position you took ("hell no" to reparations") didn't match the argument you made. If you want to make an argument why reparations shouldn't be received, then that's the argument you should have made.



But since it was the Africans who came up with this scheme and influenced the Americans who did not have a mature value system against the practice of slavery.

The africans didn't have a "mature value system against the practice of slavery. If anything it was less "mature."

And it was the people in the US who rose up against the practice of African slave trade after having been influenced by African people.

Irrelevant. I could murder 100 people as part of the mob, I could still quit the mob, but I'm still culpable for the 100 people I murdered.

And as I have frequently said, that's not a valid distinction because one freely engaging in a wrongful act initiated by another is as still culpable.

[Bowel]

Completely false.




Are you saying that the Americans/Europeans originally came up with the idea of using Africans as a commodity to be traded?

[TheMojoPin]

Are you saying that the Americans/Europeans originally came up with the idea of using Africans as a commodity to be traded?

I'm saying the Europeans came up with the European-style structured slave trade that transplanted over to the United States and most of the Western Hemisphere. If you're trying to argue who came up with the "idea" of enlaving Africans, that actually predates the Africans themselves and that just slides right into who came up with the idea of slavery in the first place. It's far too broad an argument to stand up on its own, plus there's really no historicxal evidence that the Europeans had no idea of or desire for slaves until they encountered slavery in Africa and thought, "hmmmm, that's a great idea!" That theory has pretty much no historical merit.

[led37zep]

Reparations is the dumbest idea since the Designated Hitter.

[FUNKMAN]

they should get reparations and rapearations...

[Swanny]

Send them back to the jungle with some mac and cheese and lotion!:clap:

[TheMojoPin]

Send them back to the jungle with some mac and cheese and lotion!:clap:

Can we send you instead?

[Coach]

I'm saying the Europeans came up with the European-style structured slave trade that transplanted over to the United States and most of the Western Hemisphere. If you're trying to argue who came up with the "idea" of enlaving Africans, that actually predates the Africans themselves and that just slides right into who came up with the idea of slavery in the first place. It's far too broad an argument to stand up on its own, plus there's really no historicxal evidence that the Europeans had no idea of or desire for slaves until they encountered slavery in Africa and thought, "hmmmm, that's a great idea!" That theory has pretty much no historical merit.
Umm Romans? Greeks?...Fucking Africa was THE capital of the slave trade..The moors captured people from all over and sold them as slaves.

[TheMojoPin]

Umm Romans? Greeks?...Fucking Africa was THE capital of the slave trade..The moors captured people from all over and sold them as slaves.

You did realize my post was talking about how the idea of slavery goes back as far as recorded human history, right? And Africa was never the "capital" of any kind of slave trade unless you're talking about people being removed from it. And can we stop using the word "Moor" like it's talking about all of Africa? It's amost always refering to Arabs from Northeast or Northern Africa, along the Mediteranean. The "Moorish" slave trade extending all throughout the Middle East, parts of Asia, Europe and Northern Africa was due to the Arab empires that periodoically conquered these areas in ancient times. They didn't introduce slavery or do it more than anyone else...pretty much all the ancient empires had massive slave trades and populations.

[Coach]

Yes Slavery does go back far..and in most cases, slaves were considered cattle, or livestock. And Moors were helmed by what we consider Black..not Middle Eastern.

[TheMojoPin]

Yes Slavery does go back far..and in most cases, slaves were considered cattle, or livestock. And Moors were helmed by what we consider Black..not Middle Eastern.

For the most part, that's incorrect. The Iberian peninsula was conquered by Arabs and Arab decsendents.

[Yerdaddy]

The post seemed to be implying that people should only be concerned with issues that directly affect them, i.e. Whites should not be concerned with reparations because it was blacks who suffered slavery.
Since most of this country is still white, it follows that every issue should have more whites talking about it than any other group anyway.
It is not a "white guilt" thing.
The purpose of this society is to perpetuate itself. Slaves were freed to protect the union, blacks were given legal equality to protect the nation, worker's rights were recognized to protect the nation. Striving to ensure that people have an equal opportunity to succeed will protect the nation. When you have an economically disparate nation, there is turmoil which may led to revolution.

Reparations is NOT an "issue". There's probably a dozen black Americans talking about reparations and 35 million trying to ignore them and live their lives. I've seen exactly one black "activist" on television once long ago demanding reparations, and I'm a nearly 40 year-old political junkie. On the other hand I've seen a dozen or so threads on this board in which some pissed off white person brought up reparations as a straw man to paint a picture of hoardes of black Americans demanding - and maybe possibly recieving one day - free money from the rest of us. I've seen the issue brought up by white conservative pundits in debates that had nothing to do with any movement for reparations, but to mischaracterise black issues and avoid honest discussion of those issues. Reparations is a straw man and a red herring used by racist whites to demonize blacks and create a sense of fear and animosity towards black Americans and to cheat in public debates. By no other chriteria could reparations qualify as a serious "issue" in American politics.

It's ridiculous that I even had to spell out the meaning of my original post. And it's embarassing that it's ever even brought up and taken seriously in public discussions at all.

[Serpico1103]

The fact that reparations are brought up more by pissed off white people than pissed off black people says a lot.

Perhaps for clarity your ambiguous post should have read, "The fact that reparations are brought up more by pissed off white people, against reparations, than pissed off black people, for reparations, says alot.

Of course, reparations, gay marriage, abortion, gun control, welfare, crime are all issues brought up to guide the frightened herd to the polls.

[Yerdaddy]

But more importantly - who would win in a fight: Bigfoot or Grape Ape?

[PapaBear]

Who would win in a fight: Bigfoot or Grape Ape?
Bigfoot would win against the little known Grape Ape, but The Great Grape Ape would totally kick Bigfoot's ass.

[TheMojoPin]

Bigfoot would win against the little known Grape Ape, but The Great Grape Ape would totally kick Bigfoot's ass.

Until Magilla Gorilla swoops in with a metal chair.

[EliSnow]

Send them back to the jungle with some mac and cheese and lotion!:clap:

I don't know what's worse: the dumb racist comment or that you inserted a clap smiley for your own stupid joke.

[Lunatic]

Unbelievable. Slaves were by and large intentionally kept from learning how to read or write and of course given no access to weapons. How were they supposed to coordinate ay kind of largescale revolt? Anything that wasn't a mass uprising would have been crushed almost instantly by local authorites since the slaves had no weapons and no way of coordinating a rebellion. And just because slaves outnumbered slave owners doesn't mean that non-slave owners wouldn't have put down a slave revolt. Tons of Americans didn't own slaves because they couldn't afford it, not because they didn't want to.

exactly, most americans did not benifit from slavery, they didnt even benifit from cheap cotton. the cotton was sold over seas. one of the primary reasons that there was a dislike of slavery was that it created unfair labor competition. not becuase people gave a shit about the poor negroe. if can track down the familys of the slave owners and bill them for the reparations, fine. other wise fuck off.

[britneypablo]

although i voted a firm hell no, and i continue to say hell no, im not against the idea of them learning to swim to their 40acres underwater....with over population of people and all this could be a great way to get that down, save the environment, and of course more food for me!

[furie]

Send them back to the jungle with some mac and cheese and lotion!:clap:

mac & cheese?

[ibanez23]

Anyone for reparations should put their money where their mouth is.Set up a websight and donate money for the cause.Or maybe get a direct deposit taken from your check every week.Is 10% of your weekly earnings good?Whatever makes you get over the white guilt would be suffice.

[FUNKMAN]

But more importantly - who would win in a fight: Bigfoot or Grape Ape?

Bigfoot would win against the little known Grape Ape, but The Great Grape Ape would totally kick Bigfoot's ass.

http://fusionanomaly.net/magillagorilla.jpg

[Serpico1103]

Anyone for reparations should put their money where their mouth is.Set up a websight and donate money for the cause.Or maybe get a direct deposit taken from your check every week.Is 10% of your weekly earnings good?Whatever makes you get over the white guilt would be suffice.

And when we go to war only those in favor of the war should have to pay. Might make people rethink their "patriotic" stance.
And, people without children should not have to pay for schools.
And, people unconcerned with diseases should not have to pay for research.
Its called the price of living in a society, if you don't want to share in the expenses, its easy, leave the society.

[cigarsandscotch]

I they receive reparations, they should hand the money over to the jews as reparation for building the pyramids. It's only fair.

[TheMojoPin]

I they receive reparations, they should hand the money over to the jews as reparation for building the pyramids. It's only fair.

This just seems like a weak setup for all kinds of craptacular "Jews already have all the money/own everything" jokes?

[angry gary]

i always get into "discussions" with my black union brothers who always bring up that they DESERVE reparations from "the white man". Thats a quote. i in response will tell them that after they all get there 40 acres and a mule , I will go out and buy an ounce of crack and two dozen basketballs and within an hour I will own 40,000 acres and a herd of mules. my union brothers wil laugh,AND agree with my summation.

AG

[TheMojoPin]

I will go out and buy an ounce of crack and two dozen basketballs and within an hour I will own 40,000 acres and a herd of mules.

Seriously, this makes absolutely no sense. I'm not saying that to be a jerk...I'm honestly confused.

[Snoogans]

Seriously, this makes absolutely no sense. I'm not saying that to be a jerk...I'm honestly confused.

I think he is sayin once black people get land, they will be so desperate for his crack or a basketball they will give him their land and mules to get high. I think

[TheMojoPin]

I think he is sayin once black people get land, they will be so desperate for his crack or a basketball they will give him their land and mules to get high. I think

I think he's just jealous of how Tron is LIIIIV-INNNNNN'.

[Snoogans]

I think he's just jealous of how Tron is LIIIIV-INNNNNN'.

HEY CHUCK, SUCK MY NSAOFUDALHF

[spoon]

I say everyone already gets to pay taxes, isn't that payment enough?

[nukinfuts]

But, you live in a society that "benefited" from slavery. You share in those benefits, therefore you do owe something to those who suffered from slavery. If blacks were denied rights until very, very recently it means that whites benefited from less competition. So, every white person had more opportunities then they would have had if blacks were allowed access to the same opportunity.
The end of slavery was not the end of black oppression.

I hear what you are saying here and I think that the reparations are called out more for the struggle of the blacks post slavery and into the 20th century rather than just reparations for slavery itself. But on that note wouldn't you owe women reparations for not letting us vote or hold certain jobs and then would you not also owe any class of minority reparations for any kind of discrimination they suffered? I just don't ever see it happening in this country whether Obama is elected or not. I agree slavery was a bad thing but isn't this just as much part of their heritage as any class that struggled to make it in this country and become "accepted"? As a child of the 80's I don't see differences in black and white or any other colors and I think that probably makes me a little different than say my parents who were born in the late 40's. I believe that any race can make it in this country and the playing field is becoming a little more level for everyone, black..white...hispanic...women. Anyone can go to college and anyone can make their life better than what they had it growing up. In fact if you are poor you have a better chance of having the government pay for college than if your parents have money.

[Serpico1103]

I hear what you are saying here and I think that the reparations are called out more for the struggle of the blacks post slavery and into the 20th century rather than just reparations for slavery itself. But on that note wouldn't you owe women reparations for not letting us vote or hold certain jobs and then would you not also owe any class of minority reparations for any kind of discrimination they suffered? I just don't ever see it happening in this country whether Obama is elected or not. I agree slavery was a bad thing but isn't this just as much part of their heritage as any class that struggled to make it in this country and become "accepted"? As a child of the 80's I don't see differences in black and white or any other colors and I think that probably makes me a little different than say my parents who were born in the late 40's. I believe that any race can make it in this country and the playing field is becoming a little more level for everyone, black..white...hispanic...women. Anyone can go to college and anyone can make their life better than what they had it growing up. In fact if you are poor you have a better chance of having the government pay for college than if your parents have money.

Yes, if people suffered harm due to legalized oppression then the government does owe them something. The logistics of course make implementing a plan very difficult. Also, reparations, if they were to happen, should have occurred immediately. I am not pro-reparations. Just, hate the attitude that once you have legal equality there is socio-economic equality.
The same people who rail against reparations cry when inheritance tax is brought. Whats the matter, can't your kid elevate himself without your handout?
Yes, a poor kid can easily enter college, get a good job and raise his social status. Easy, except for the fact that as a kid he does not realize the importance of this. He does not have the guidance or opportunities that a person from a higher class does. It is possible for him to elevate himself, but much less likely, due to social dynamics beyond his control.

[Lunatic]

And when we go to war only those in favor of the war should have to pay. Might make people rethink their "patriotic" stance.
And, people without children should not have to pay for schools.
And, people unconcerned with diseases should not have to pay for research.
Its called the price of living in a society, if you don't want to share in the expenses, its easy, leave the society.

This is getting old, but what the heck.
ours taxes pay for war, which in theory is for the protection of our society as a whole. If the war (iraq) is not for the good of the whole then the war is wrong, not the taxes or the people. school taxes are definetly for the good of ALL society, a uneducated puplic is what led to the problems america is facing now. Liberal Douchebags playin games of "dont hurt my baby's feelin's by making it live up to real education standards" ruined education. Disease studys once again help us as a whole. repartions are only so Liberal Douche's can say "oooooo poor negreo who cant live up to the standards of our society, we are sorry". Ask a black man from outside of the u.s. what he thinks of american blacks sometime. I worked with a man from uganda, VERY EDUCATED, BUSTED HIS OWN ASS TO GET THE EDUCATION, he HATED american blacks. called them LAZY ASSED NIGGERS right to their faces. Reparations fix nothing, they dont say "I'm so sorry" they dont fix the fact they where slaves, and they god damned sure do do ANYTHING FOR THE GOOD OF SOCIETY AS A FUCKIN WHOLE. so if you want to show the poor oppressed negroe how fuckin sorry your douche ass is SUCK HIS COCK, but dont pay him off.

[Serpico1103]

This is getting old, but what the heck.
ours taxes pay for war, which in theory is for the protection of our society as a whole. If the war (iraq) is not for the good of the whole then the war is wrong, not the taxes or the people. school taxes are definetly for the good of ALL society, a uneducated puplic is what led to the problems america is facing now. Liberal Douchebags playin games of "dont hurt my baby's feelin's by making it live up to real education standards" ruined education. Disease studys once again help us as a whole. repartions are only so Liberal Douche's can say "oooooo poor negreo who cant live up to the standards of our society, we are sorry". Ask a black man from outside of the u.s. what he thinks of american blacks sometime. I worked with a man from uganda, VERY EDUCATED, BUSTED HIS OWN ASS TO GET THE EDUCATION, he HATED american blacks. called them LAZY ASSED NIGGERS right to their faces. Reparations fix nothing, they dont say "I'm so sorry" they dont fix the fact they where slaves, and they god damned sure do do ANYTHING FOR THE GOOD OF SOCIETY AS A FUCKIN WHOLE. so if you want to show the poor oppressed negroe how fuckin sorry your douche ass is SUCK HIS COCK, but dont pay him off.

Wow, really working hard to live up to that name "lunatic."
Yes, I know liberals destroyed the United States. Liberals are tree hugging faggots, yet they are able to seize power and control the direction of the US.
So, you respect the Ugandan's opinion of US citizens, but when citizen's from other countries proclaim their hatred for the US, it is because they "hate our freedom."
Grow up child.
You are a pawn of the powerful. Stop buying into that "liberal" crap. Your enemy is not the "liberal", it is the corrupt and powerful people leading this country for personal gain, democrat and republicans.
Where were you educated?
No one is saying that if you struggle and work very hard you can't get ahead. What people believe is that the playing field is unfairly tilted for one side.
If I give you a 400 yard head start in a 800 yard race, can you still win? Yes, but would you just accept it as your own failure if you lost?
Stop trying to be such a tough guy.

[TheMojoPin]

This is getting old, but what the heck.
ours taxes pay for war, which in theory is for the protection of our society as a whole. If the war (iraq) is not for the good of the whole then the war is wrong, not the taxes or the people. school taxes are definetly for the good of ALL society, a uneducated puplic is what led to the problems america is facing now. Liberal Douchebags playin games of "dont hurt my baby's feelin's by making it live up to real education standards" ruined education. Disease studys once again help us as a whole. repartions are only so Liberal Douche's can say "oooooo poor negreo who cant live up to the standards of our society, we are sorry". Ask a black man from outside of the u.s. what he thinks of american blacks sometime. I worked with a man from uganda, VERY EDUCATED, BUSTED HIS OWN ASS TO GET THE EDUCATION, he HATED american blacks. called them LAZY ASSED NIGGERS right to their faces. Reparations fix nothing, they dont say "I'm so sorry" they dont fix the fact they where slaves, and they god damned sure do do ANYTHING FOR THE GOOD OF SOCIETY AS A FUCKIN WHOLE. so if you want to show the poor oppressed negroe how fuckin sorry your douche ass is SUCK HIS COCK, but dont pay him off.

You do realize you're ranting about something that nobody seriously wants or expects to happen, right? Painting blacks as sitting around wating for or demanding reparations, or "liberals" doing the same, is completely seperated from reality. You're making a bigger issue of it than most of those people with your little rants right here.

[Serpico1103]

Wow, really working hard to live up to that name "lunatic."
Yes, I know liberals destroyed the United States. Liberals are tree hugging faggots, yet they are able to seize power and control the direction of the US.
So, you respect the Ugandan's opinion of US citizens, but when citizen's from other countries proclaim their hatred for the US, it is because they "hate our freedom."
Grow up child.
You are a pawn of the powerful. Stop buying into that "liberal" crap. Your enemy is not the "liberal", it is the corrupt and powerful people leading this country for personal gain, democrat and republicans.
Where were you educated?
No one is saying that if you struggle and work very hard you can't get ahead. What people believe is that the playing field is unfairly tilted for one side.
If I give you a 400 yard head start in a 800 yard race, can you still win? Yes, but would you just accept it as your own failure if you lost?
Stop trying to be such a tough guy.

Sorry meant," take a 400 yard head start"

[sailor]

You do realize you're ranting about something that nobody seriously wants or expects to happen, right? Painting blacks as sitting around wating for or demanding reparations, or "liberals" doing the same, is completely seperated from reality. You're making a bigger issue of it than most of those people with your little rants right here.

do you realize you're arguing with a lunatic?

[A.J.]

You did realize my post was talking about how the idea of slavery goes back as far as recorded human history, right? And Africa was never the "capital" of any kind of slave trade unless you're talking about people being removed from it. And can we stop using the word "Moor" like it's talking about all of Africa? It's amost always refering to Arabs from Northeast or Northern Africa, along the Mediteranean. The "Moorish" slave trade extending all throughout the Middle East, parts of Asia, Europe and Northern Africa was due to the Arab empires that periodoically conquered these areas in ancient times. They didn't introduce slavery or do it more than anyone else...pretty much all the ancient empires had massive slave trades and populations.

No...those were the Moops.

[Lunatic]

:nono:Wow, really working hard to live up to that name "lunatic."
Yes, I know liberals destroyed the United States. Liberals are tree hugging faggots, yet they are able to seize power and control the direction of the US.
So, you respect the Ugandan's opinion of US citizens, but when citizen's from other countries proclaim their hatred for the US, it is because they "hate our freedom."
Grow up child.
You are a pawn of the powerful. Stop buying into that "liberal" crap. Your enemy is not the "liberal", it is the corrupt and powerful people leading this country for personal gain, democrat and republicans.
Where were you educated?
No one is saying that if you struggle and work very hard you can't get ahead. What people believe is that the playing field is unfairly tilted for one side.
If I give you a 400 yard head start in a 800 yard race, can you still win? Yes, but would you just accept it as your own failure if you lost?
Stop trying to be such a tough guy.

wow, never said he hated americans, he just hated american blacks. blacks outside of the u.s. are expected to act and be treated just like any other ethnic group. yes, some people will hate them and treat them different, guess what, ALL ETHNIC GROUPS WHERE TREATED LIKE SHIT and MOST STILL ARE IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER (hell i hate the fuckin french) but most society's expect them to prove they can make it and struggle the same as every one else. YES i say they have all of the same opportunity's, they even had more than quite a few whites as they get preferential acceptance to colledges and jobs. no its not perfect but all these people who are sayin that the poor black man is held back by evil whitey isnt facing the truth. BLACKS HOLD BACK BLACKS. the separate society that they demand we accept (and so many sorry assed whiggers do) is unacceptable in to a mojority of ALL SOCIETY including racial minoritys. my family where irish and german immagrents that where hated when they came to america. there where no fuckin jobs for mics or krauts, they didnt cry about the evil man holding them back, they where fuckin treated like animals where they came from. they busted there ass's and proved their worth to society.
oh, and one last thing. i am nobodys pawn, i am not identified by any party or ideology. I have 2 degree's how bout you fuckwad. and i aint a "tough guy" i am a fat asshole, prolly only difference tween you and me is I DONT LIVE IN MY PARENTS BASEMENT AND MASTURBATE TO STARWARS.:devil2:

[Serpico1103]

:nono:

wow, never said he hated americans, he just hated american blacks. blacks outside of the u.s. are expected to act and be treated just like any other ethnic group. yes, some people will hate them and treat them different, guess what, ALL ETHNIC GROUPS WHERE TREATED LIKE SHIT and MOST STILL ARE IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER (hell i hate the fuckin french) but most society's expect them to prove they can make it and struggle the same as every one else. YES i say they have all of the same opportunity's, they even had more than quite a few whites as they get preferential acceptance to colledges and jobs. no its not perfect but all these people who are sayin that the poor black man is held back by evil whitey isnt facing the truth. BLACKS HOLD BACK BLACKS. the separate society that they demand we accept (and so many sorry assed whiggers do) is unacceptable in to a mojority of ALL SOCIETY including racial minoritys. my family where irish and german immagrents that where hated when they came to america. there where no fuckin jobs for mics or krauts, they didnt cry about the evil man holding them back, they where fuckin treated like animals where they came from. they busted there ass's and proved their worth to society.
oh, and one last thing. i am nobodys pawn, i am not identified by any party or ideology. I have 2 degree's how bout you fuckwad. and i aint a "tough guy" i am a fat asshole, prolly only difference tween you and me is I DONT LIVE IN MY PARENTS BASEMENT AND MASTURBATE TO STARWARS.:devil2:

First, since you asked, I have four degrees, working on my fifth. And, I could have guessed the part about you being a fat asshole. All that unfocused keyboard anger gave it away.
Second, I did not say that you said he hated all Americans, just that you trust his opinion, but then you are the same person to not understand why other people dislike America. Like possibly the French, who disagreed with how we handled Iraq. Maybe we should have listened to the damn French after all. Or we could have listened to Bush I and Cheney who both said after the first gulf war that we didn't remove Saddam because we would be incapable of handling the chaos that would follow. Yet, years later they were caught off guard by the fact that removing Saddam caused chaos we could not handle.
Third, I know all groups suffered discrimination. One of the differences is, a black man is always and easily identifiable as a black man. What does an Irishman look like? What does a German look like? Besides that, if you think the discrimination all other groups faced, except Asians, comes close to what blacks suffered than you are stupider than I even think you are.
Finally, please pay attention. My main point is that poor people in general, blacks and whites make up that group, do not have the same opportunities to excel as wealthy people. Yet, middle class whites who were born middle class and remain middle class scream that poor blacks remain poor out of laziness. If middle class whites can't elevate their situation why do they call others, with less opportunities to excel, lazy?
Here is a simple example of the tilted playing field for you. New York City has four major sports teams; Yankees, Mets, Knicks, Rangers. Do you know how all the men running them got their job? From working hard, excelling in school and professionally? While, maybe it was that their fathers gave them the business. Not exactly the meritocracy that you think you live in.

[sailor]

My main point is that poor people in general, blacks and whites make up that group, do not have the same opportunities to excel as wealthy people. Yet, middle class whites who were born middle class and remain middle class scream that poor blacks remain poor out of laziness. If middle class whites can't elevate their situation why do they call others, with less opportunities to excel, lazy?


i'd argue it's easier to elevate from poor to middle class than to start at middle class and elevate to upper class.

[Serpico1103]

i'd argue it's easier to elevate from poor to middle class than to start at middle class and elevate to upper class.

I appreciate your point. But, I think it is the same struggle. A middle class child has middle class parents, attends a school in a middle class neighborhood or a private school, is surrounded by middle class and upper middle class examples of success. So, the climb is a further, but there is more help along the way. A poor child, has poor parents, attends a school in a poor neighborhood, or a school in a middle class neighborhood that most middle class and upper middle class people try to avoid by sending their children to private schools, and they are surrounded by poor people with little guidance or role models for success.
Have you ever been in a NYC project, they are better now than in the 80's, but still a disaster? Do you really think those children have much hope of getting out?

[sailor]

I appreciate your point. But, I think it is the same struggle. A middle class child has middle class parents, attends a school in a middle class neighborhood or a private school, is surrounded by middle class and upper middle class examples of success. So, the climb is a further, but there is more help along the way. A poor child, has poor parents, attends a school in a poor neighborhood, or a school in a middle class neighborhood that most middle class and upper middle class people try to avoid by sending their children to private schools, and they are surrounded by poor people with little guidance or role models for success.
Have you ever been in a NYC project, they are better now than in the 80's, but still a disaster? Do you really think those children have much hope of getting out?

i'd say i elevated myself from a poor family and am now probably upper-middle class (depending on definitions for both), so i think i know what i'm talking about. it just took hard work, working from near the bottom and doing a good job. for my kids to elevate above middle class, i'd imagine would take some amount of luck, not just hard work.

[Serpico1103]

i'd say i elevated myself from a poor family and am now probably upper-middle class (depending on definitions for both), so i think i know what i'm talking about. it just took hard work, working from near the bottom and doing a good job. for my kids to elevate above middle class, i'd imagine would take some amount of luck, not just hard work.

It is something to be proud of to have elevated yourself. However, are you black? did you have parents that loved you? that appreciated your hard work? were you in extreme poverty? But, this isn't about how you, one person, made it. It is about society as a whole. Magic Johnson is still alive, but I think HIV kills people.

I think with loving parents who encourage their children, anything is possible. However, many children, in any economic class, do not have good parents. But, middle class and wealthy children have other resources to help, poor children can feel very isolated from "society."

[alabamatrucker]

I wish earl was still a slave. Maybe a whip would motivate his lazy ass to do some work.
FACE EARL!:laugh:

[sailor]

It is something to be proud of to have elevated yourself. However, are you black? did you have parents that loved you? that appreciated your hard work? were you in extreme poverty? But, this isn't about how you, one person, made it. It is about society as a whole. Magic Johnson is still alive, but I think HIV kills people.

I think with loving parents who encourage their children, anything is possible. However, many children, in any economic class, do not have good parents. But, middle class and wealthy children have other resources to help, poor children can feel very isolated from "society."

i'd never try to make it about me, just you seemed to be saying i had no clue what i was talking aboot. we weren't in extreme poverty and my parents were just normal average parents. i'm also white as snow, but never knew any white people not related to me until high school (search for the class pictures thread...i was adorable).

[Serpico1103]

i'd never try to make it about me, just you seemed to be saying i had no clue what i was talking aboot. we weren't in extreme poverty and my parents were just normal average parents. i'm also white as snow, but never knew any white people not related to me until high school (search for the class pictures thread...i was adorable).

I didn't think you were "trying to make it about you."
I don't think you have no clue what you are talking about.
I agreed that the climb from middle class to upper class is longer than the climb from poverty to middle class. My only point was that a poor person is presented with more obstacles along the way. Poor kids are discouraged by their environment to do well, while middle class children are encouraged by their environment to do well.
I think if a poor child has the drive and desire to excel, they can. Nevertheless, I think the problem is that there are no external factors instilling that drive and desire. Most of the external factors are pushing the kid down, keeping him poor.

[jonyrotn]

although i voted a firm hell no, and i continue to say hell no, im not against the idea of them learning to swim to their 40 acres

:ohmy: :blink: :down: :nono: :wacko: :thumbdown: :annoyed:
Oh man!!!
You rooooon'd it!
:sad:

Although, I do like that blonde wig you cover your 'skin head' with...
Do you at least have tolerance for bi-curious females?
Or, does that get a curb stomp too, lady earthenbrown?

[lleeder]

They should get up front parking.

[sailor]

They should get up front parking.

i guess i should mention i just cut off my left leg.

[Lunatic]

It is something to be proud of to have elevated yourself. However, are you black? did you have parents that loved you? that appreciated your hard work? were you in extreme poverty? But, this isn't about how you, one person, made it. It is about society as a whole. Magic Johnson is still alive, but I think HIV kills people.

I think with loving parents who encourage their children, anything is possible. However, many children, in any economic class, do not have good parents. But, middle class and wealthy children have other resources to help, poor children can feel very isolated from "society."

Sorry bout loosin my mind a bit, but that just proves my sanity. Ive got to ask though, what blacks youve gotten to know? ive met two groups. first is the welfare cases that moved to my town after illinois changed the welfare laws. my town (60,000 or so) maybe had 50 or so blacks that where primarily colledge students until the changes to the system. the chicago welfare bums flooded in.and no,, none of them where white (and no there is no point to that, just clarification) what we got was a flood of demand to the system. we where a little bluecollar town and all of a sudden whoosh, a bunch of bad examples of the "African american's". it set a example to a lot of us that had really never met them before. The second group i got to know are my fellow truck drivers that are black. here was a group of people that discovered that when they stopped whining about whats fair and applied themselves they could have the same chance of success as ANY white.
Really i dont care if they get rep's, in fact it would be interesting to watch the hatred of them grow as all of the other racial groups that have earned their success hate them even more.
guess i'm done here. i got a nice reaction from serpico, it would be interestin to see if rep's did happen though.
Bwaaahahahahahahahahahaha

[DVonDudley]

Does welfare count ??:innocent:

[Serpico1103]

Sorry bout loosin my mind a bit, but that just proves my sanity. Ive got to ask though, what blacks youve gotten to know? ive met two groups. first is the welfare cases that moved to my town after illinois changed the welfare laws. my town (60,000 or so) maybe had 50 or so blacks that where primarily colledge students until the changes to the system. the chicago welfare bums flooded in.and no,, none of them where white (and no there is no point to that, just clarification) what we got was a flood of demand to the system. we where a little bluecollar town and all of a sudden whoosh, a bunch of bad examples of the "African american's". it set a example to a lot of us that had really never met them before. The second group i got to know are my fellow truck drivers that are black. here was a group of people that discovered that when they stopped whining about whats fair and applied themselves they could have the same chance of success as ANY white.
Really i dont care if they get rep's, in fact it would be interesting to watch the hatred of them grow as all of the other racial groups that have earned their success hate them even more.
guess i'm done here. i got a nice reaction from serpico, it would be interestin to see if rep's did happen though.
Bwaaahahahahahahahahahaha

I live in Brooklyn, so I have met many black people in my personal and work life.
They are as diversified as white people.
There are more white people on welfare than there black. I know that there are more white people in the country, but lets not act like only black people use and/or abuse the system.
If they want to take their reparation money (again I am not pro-reparations) and smoke crack or do whatever you think lazy blacks do, that is their right as Americans. I can not tell you how to spend your money. Their great grandparents, or whoever, earned that money, so they can spend it as they wish.
But you keep missing my point. My point, is that we as a nation are not taking care of our children. "Children are our future." As an adult, a person is for the most part who they are and most be treated as responsible for their actions. However, I think children are innocent victims of their environment and it is our responsibility as members of this society to protect and guide the children of this country.

[barrytheblade]

I personally feel that this is just one of those revolving questions that will never be answered or fully addressed. Much like the abortion issue, it's one that can never be solved in a way that would give both sides closure.

If you look at it from a completely compassionless angle, as any good judge would, people brought over from Africa or any other country as slaves were beaten (in life, I mean). A conquered people are the losers in the constant natural battle for life and evolutionary dominance.

Much like a child that falls into the pool or the people who are killed in an earthquake, they lose in the game of life. It's sometimes a matter of the society in which they live whether they are a single loss or part of a larger group. A higher society tends to lose less people because: 1) Their society has taken the proper precautions to ensure healthier living and lessen the chance of a high death rate in an accident; 2) Nature itself knows how to control a population level and acts accordingly, killing those lower in the evolutionary prospective ladder. Or, in this case, forcing the lower ones to be dominated by the higher ones.

Paying reparations is ludicrous. If they had had armies to fight off their captors they would have been considered higher up on the human totem pole and would have been spared. They didn't. They lost. You don't pay the people you defeat. They've done nothing to earn it.

Compassion does separate us from other animals. It is one of the definitions of a human animal. It enables us to love and hate and be happy and sad. But compassion is nature's worst enemy. It is, therefore, an enemy of humans; however, we fail to see that. Our compassion puts us at war with nature. It prevents nature from controlling population and disease.

Nature is judge, jury and executioner. Sorry, Earl. That's just how it is. I know this sounds really racist and coarse, but that's the way I see it. I'm a realist. Remember, in the end, all of this means nothing. Five hundred years from now there won't even be a memory of it.