Reparations

Maybe there is no "animus", Noah.

Maybe the animus is a figment of your imagination.

Maybe there are people who honestly see the notion of "reparations" as absolute blather.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Maybe there is no "animus", Noah.

Maybe the animus is a figment of your imagination.

Maybe there are people who honestly see the notion of "reparations" as absolute blather.

Quote:

Main Entry: maybe
Function: noun
Date: circa 1586
(meaning) UNCERTAINTY; PERHAPS

MAYBE, you might want to use another term and just come out and say what you mean! Because MAYBE it is and MAYBE it isn't? Was it you who said... WHO KNOWS?

Well it certainly seems like even on an anonymous thing like an Internet msg board people are still afraid to say what they really feel. MAYBE its because they are full-time cowards. MAYBE not? WHO KNOWS?

But I know exactly what I think!! MAYBE you do too! :wink:

0 Replies

Noah's Hard Left Hook! wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Maybe there is no "animus", Noah.

Maybe the animus is a figment of your imagination.

Maybe there are people who honestly see the notion of "reparations" as absolute blather.

Quote:
Main Entry: maybe
Function: noun
Date: circa 1586
(meaning) UNCERTAINTY; PERHAPS

MAYBE, you might want to use another term and just come out and say what you mean! Because MAYBE it is and MAYBE it isn't? Was it you who said... WHO KNOWS?

Well it certainly seems like even on an anonymous thing like an Internet msg board people are still afraid to say what they really feel. MAYBE its because they are full-time cowards. MAYBE not? WHO KNOWS?

But I know exactly what I think!! MAYBE you do too! :wink:

Well, "animus" certainly does not play a part in my opposition to "reparations", Noah.

I think I made myself plenty clear.

And I used the word "maybe" appropriately for the situation at hand.

But beyond that, I do not need a fuzzy thinker like you suggesting that I may be too cowardly to speak my mind with forthrightness -- because if ever there was a person with no worries on that account, I am that person.

Of course, you didn't exactly say...perhaps because you are a person who does not say what he means.

0 Replies

Quote:

Well, "animus" certainly does not play a part in my opposition to "reparations", Noah.

Well, then... Say what you mean.

And seriously if as I posed there is a model wherein your tax moneyt isn't concerned then what does it matter what you think about it?
It's no sweat of your brow as they say. Nothing would be coming out your pockets. What else is there to say? And what would be you motivation or reason for saying anything then?

Be forthright!

(And you save the rest. If you are all that you say you are let your posts do the talkin'. PS. I'm not impressed. You just wasted a whole post and have said nothing to the point. MAYBE you know what I'm thinking now!)

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

i can see reparations via land restoration to the Leni Lenape or the Eriorhonon, or the cherokee more than I can see reparations to families of former slaves. However, the reality that most of the land of the lenis is sE pennsylvania and the Eriorhonon were wiped out by the Confederation of Iroquois.and would claim the area from rochester to Cleveland/ Distribution would be difficult or impossible, and would most likely be not used to restore ancient hunting and living grounds.

what does the concept of reparation serve ? How would they be calculated?

However much it takes to achieve ecnomic parity.
We can apply this to the Native Americans too. No it does not have to be land.
Free private, pre-K, after-school, undergrad, and post-grad education, more liberal home and small business loan approval, free childcare, free drug rehab, free food, greater police presence in the neighborhood... basically anything that will lift the people out of the vicious cycle of poverty.

0 Replies

what he said., sorta sums it up Noah. Ive got little time to argue the meaning of "is". obviously your position is abundantely clear, so is mine. Deal with it.

what is the error of my wishing that my taxes were individually accountable? you have a problem with that?

hink of all the govt boondoggles we could shut down.

0 Replies

Quote:

what is the error of my wishing that my taxes were individually accountable? you have a problem with that?

Obviously you got something confused...

I have no problem with the tax issue. I was trying to make sure that is your position. For the most part, I have no issues with what you have said. And it's apparently clear that we agree about 'the cities'.

So what is it that you are confused about?
I'm just asking if it is all about the money. Because if it is, then ultimately I'm in full agreement with you and would like for my taxes to be "individually accountable" as well.

So what do you feel like I'm arguing with you about?
I only asked you a question or two to be sure of your position and made one comment about the paradox of blacks being taxed under segregation.

I respect you not wanting to argue per se over a position that you are sure of... That's basically the way I feel as well. So we have a little in common. I was trying to establish a dialogue along the lines of what I asked you but I guess I did a very poor job of it. This is all prefaced by what I said has been my experience discussing this elsewhere.

If you care to answer it, I would appreciate if you would consider my question:

If there was a way for there to be reparations without using your taxes...
would you approve of it? Would that satisfy your displeasure with it?

To me, as one who advocates or favors it, I see this as a way to a compromise. And I think exactly what you said about accountability is of utmost important.

So am I to assume that you would have no problem whatsoever with reparations if it fulfilled that condition of not coming out of your taxes?
I just want to be sure that's what you think in order to understand what really is at issue.

0 Replies

Hmm, I guess I hoped for too much with this thread. I didn't really want to discuss the justifications of reparations, just the practical viability.

But hey, such is the nature of polemic subjects and message boards. I still hope that peni doesn't become the subject. If you guys could help me out with that I'd appreciate it.

I'll read your links later on Noah and comment on them.

Thanks for posting them.

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

Hmm, I guess I hoped for too much with this thread. I didn't really want to discuss the justifications of reparations, just the practical viability.

But hey, such is the nature of polemic subjects and message boards. I still hope that peni doesn't become the subject. If you guys could help me out with that I'd appreciate it.

I'll read your links later on Noah and comment on them.

Thanks for posting them.

Practical Viability?? Isn't that something a little different from pure mode of implementation? Maybe I missed something but I thought that's what this thread was about?

You might consider what I had to say about agreeing with the idea and the application as being woven together. I don't see how you can disagree with the idea and then agree with or see the merits of its adoption via any certain form or manner. That just doesn't compute.

Sorry, I don't know what "peni" means....

Perhaps you can answer the question I posed to farmerman?
Is it all about the money or what?

0 Replies

Noah's Hard Left Hook! wrote:

You might consider what I had to say about agreeing with the idea and the application as being woven together. I don't see how you can disagree with the idea and then agree with or see the merits of its adoption via any certain form or manner. That just doesn't compute.

It's also not been asserted. To explain: I wasn't interested in the discussion of the merits of reparations. I just wanted to hear from those who support reparations and have them explain how they envision the implementation of it.

Quote:

Sorry, I don't know what "peni" means....

I was referencing the discusions on penises and saying that I'd prefer that it occur elsewhere.

Quote:

Perhaps you can answer the question I posed to farmerman?
Is it all about the money or what?

I did not read your exchange with farmerman and will do so when I get a chance.

But to me it has little to do with money. Except, of course, that the reparations would probably be in the form of money (I don't think it'd be land or some such).

0 Replies

Quote:

Just pointing out that the only legal entity in NORTH America that could have such an obligation slated to it would be the Confederacy (that did legislate such differences between its citizens).

Well, to answer that real quick. I do think the Civil War was fought to save The UNION! Both North & South benefitted from slavery. It was integral to the whole economy and not just in the South. And slavery gave the South undue power as it was in the say politically throughout the whole country. Remember the 3/5 compromise?

Enslaved Africans weren't free and couldn't vote (for themselves) but 60% of their person could be counted as votes for the very people who enslaved them. (Damn! There goes another one of those paradoxes!)

Now, as far as I know, there is still a UNION of these United States...

0 Replies

Craven...
Well, I really do suggest you read those links if you think it's all about cash money as in the form of payment.

I don't know where you got that idea. All the more reason to use this great resource and research it on your own...

My question is about whether the opposition to reparations or the objections are principally objections to having one's tax "monies" used for such.

0 Replies

Reparations should be paid by those who owned slaves directly to those who were slaves or whose parents were slaves. I am sure that there are many detailed records available.

Other than that, reparations for slavery has no practical purpose in the US.

0 Replies

Noah,

When I asked for people to share their ideal ideal in terms of reparations I was hoping to hear from people who support reparations and what they would like to see done (with as much precise detail as possible).

You shared two links that touch on some of the questions that I asked. Is the information on those pages information that you agree with?

Here are some excerpts that touch on the questions I asked:

Quote:

What forms should reparations take?

The material forms of reparations include cash payments, land, economic development, and repatriation resources particularly to those who are descendants of enslaved Africans.

Other forms of reparations for Black people of African descent include funds for scholarships and community development; creation of multi-media depictions of the history of Black people of African descent and textbooks for educational institutions that tell the story from the African descendants'perspective; development of historical monuments and museums; the return of artifacts and art to appropriate people or institutions; exoneration of political prisoners; and, the elimination of laws and practices that maintain dual systems in the major areas of life including the punishment system, health, education and the financial/economic system. The forms of reparations received should improve the lives of African descendents in the United States for future generations to come; foster complete economic, social and political parity; and allow for full rights of self-determination.

Who should receive reparations?

Within the broadest definition, all Black people of African descent in the United States should receive reparations in the form of changes in or elimination of laws and practices that allow them to be treated differently and less well than White people. For example, ending racial profiling and discrimination in the provision of health care, providing scholarship and community development funds for Black people of African descent, and supporting processes of self determination will not only benefit descendants of enslaved Africans, but all African descendant peoples in the United States who because of their color are victims of the vestiges of slavery. This is similar to the Rosewood, Florida reparations package, where some forms of reparations were provided only to persons who descended from those who were injured, died and lost their homes and other forms were made available to all Black people of African descent in Florida.

Who must make reparations?

N'COBRA seeks reparations at this time from two groups: governments and corporations. There are individuals, families, and religious institutions that directly benefited from slavery in the United States, and who, if acting in good faith, would contribute to reparations funds for use in assisting in the reparations process. However, we choose to focus on government and corporations because of their particular role in the horrific tragedies of chattel slavery and the continuing vestiges of slavery we live with today. In addition, we recognize that all White people to some extent have benefited from slavery and the underlying lie of
White Supremacy that allowed it to exist for two and one-half centuries in the United States. This lie has led to what is commonly called "white skin privilege" and results in unspoken benefits to White people. The process of reparations would include creating ways to change the culture of "white skin privilege" that was created to sustain chattel slavery and its continuing vestiges.

Please let me know if these are positions you share. And if there are differences please clarify what said differences are.

0 Replies

what I know about reperations has to do with native americans. listening in.....

0 Replies

Quote:

Please let me know if these are positions you share. And if there are differences please clarify what said differences are.

I've already stipulated to where I differ. As far as details are concerned, I don't think I have to spell it out. Plus I'm not in the game of answering some one else's questions (fully) until mine are. Plus considering the fact that I told you I wasn't about to discuss this with you in the sense of revealing details because it is useless. All the more reason why I offered those links.

I don't presume my personal opinion to be of much import (at least now). Therefore, I have no need to promote it here especially considering what I consider the suspect manner inwhich you have went about this (your title post). I give you credit for your moderation as in you limited role/input, but my reservations - about having "common ground" agreement in principle on the principle - stand.

Also, what I think is further contingent on understanding or having an answer to what I asked in the most honest way possible. It would seem to me that the principal objection revolves around taxes. When the questions of "who pays" and "why should I pay" are answered with a "not you" since you don't approve.... then "I" feel the essential problem is resolved.

I think as citizens it is our taxes and shared interest in using them optimally is what gives us a say. I haven't heard politicians seeking to address an agenda specified to them by non-tax payers... especially as the cheif voice of direction of a policy. So I guess that's what you're saying now. Since it's not so much about the money and since I have proposed that it not be with your money..... you still feel you should have a say.

Yeah! I can see where that makes sense.
Could tell me where else you have input .... say in a city where you don't live and "pay taxes".... into how those who do, use them and into the "practicality" of the implementation? That to me would the epitome of "none of your business".... (but I guess you didn't ask me about that.)

As far as what I agree with, let's make it simple.... put me down for everything listed there and we'll sort it out in the wash (when my question is honestly dealt with and if I decide to discuss details. I've said plenty...).

0 Replies

Noah,

I think your exclusions in the validity of opinions to be counterproductive to discussion.

For the purposes of this discussion each person's opinions stand on their merit, not on criteria that you seek to establish for their validity.

Simply put, this is a discussion, anyone with an opinion and the ability to express it civilly is welcome to do so.

I respect that you do not wish to answer the questions. I will wait for someone who supports reparations to decide to do so.

0 Replies

Noah's Hard Left Hook! wrote:

....when my question is honestly dealt with and if I decide to discuss details...

Which question? Was it posed to me? I also missed where you stipulated your differences. If you can point the way I'll read up on it.

0 Replies

Noah's Hard Left Hook! wrote:

Quote:
Just pointing out that the only legal entity in NORTH America that could have such an obligation slated to it would be the Confederacy (that did legislate such differences between its citizens).

Well, to answer that real quick. I do think the Civil War was fought to save The UNION!
Enslaved Africans weren't free and couldn't vote (for themselves) but 60% of their person could be counted as votes for the very people who enslaved them.
Now, as far as I know, there is still a UNION of these United States...

Read on....

Quote:

The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several Sates; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.

Some personal observations based on this.....

So in the North, you could be a 'Free Negro' (tho more negro, than free). You could own property, travel freely, organise and join institutions, print newspapers, negotiate your own work and wages, run a business, sit on juries, even enjoy the right to vote (in some states) and lawfully agitate for social and political reform.

In the South, you could work for massa, be punished on whim, be sold, have your children sold and enjoy no personal rights.

Three questions I will now pose.....

1. Now which of these two entities do you think fully embraced the ideas and practices of the American Revolution?
2. Which of these economic blocs fully expected to make it's economy one based on forced labour?
3. Then who do you think would be the most logical target for a legal action to recover damages?

0 Replies

Noah's Hard Left Hook! wrote:

I guess that shows your "roots" and how they run deep... deep.... deep into the Deep South. (Though King said he faced some of the most wickedly racist people in the North! Hmmmm.... )

One more thing Noah. If you ever use this forum again to either call me a racist or imply that I am such, I will first make a formal complaint to the appropriate moderator. I will then proceed to match you word for word and insult for insult until one of us is banned from this forum. I find racist behaviour or attitudes repugnant and have always, in my personal life and workplace, acted to correct such behaviour and attitudes whenever I was presented with it.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know