Reparations

Quote:

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.

Tell me am I supposed to feel scared, threatened or what?

And I didn't ask you for a testimonial?
Who are you trying to prove something to?

Make your formal complaint. Match what you will.
Those are definitely your perogatives. No need to announce them.
Just do it!

0 Replies

Quote:

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;

Thank you! You just made my point for me. It was something approved of, sanctioned and protected by both North & South. Now, when you can find a real way to separate the industry of the North and ag production of the South then let me know.... and tell me how the economy of either functioned independently.

Well, I think they did not, neither did the federal gov't otherwise there would be no language about Congress in your piece. A link to your source would be nice as well.

There was slavery and serious discrimination in the North as well. Check your history... then check it twice.

0 Replies

I'm not in favor of reparations so this post is jumping the gun, but I'm going to throw it in for the consideration of anyone who does take up Craven's challenge:

McGentrix wrote:

Quote:

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.

Of course, as the slaveowners, slaves, and children of slaves, are all now deceased, this is a workable solution. But for those who think reparations should extend to the current generation, there are other issues to consider.

The fly in that ointment is the complex nature of our ancestory. Many people are descended from both slaveowners AND slaves. Would these people be required to pay themselves?

Unless your ancestors all arrived after the Civil War, the chances are good your ancestors were involved, quite possibly on both sides of the issue, and sorting out exactly who would owe how much to who is not possible.

In researching my own (northern) ancestry, my mother was surprised to discover that an ancestor in Massachusetts owned household slaves in the 1600s. As far as I know, he was the only one in my direct line who ever did own slaves, but, as with most people, most of my family history is unknown and not likely to be found. As I am a 12th generation descendent of this one man (and his wife), how culpable should I be personally? Each generation back doubles the number of direct ancestors; 2 parents, 4 grandparents, etc; at the 12th generation, you have 4,096 sets of great-plus-ten grandparents.

Do I owe a 1/4,096 (0.000244%) share for the one bad egg I know about? And shouldn't the culpability be divided among the thousands of living descendents that one great-plus-ten grandparents produced? And should someone else escape restitution, just because his family connections have not been discovered?

And of course the bigger question is: whether or not we hold slaveowners' descendents responsible, or assume the burden as a nation, where will the funds come from, and who should be eligible to receive them?

0 Replies

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

I forget?? Were you trying to promote Congress as the culprit or the Confederacy?? Embarrassed

0 Replies

Noah's Hard Left Hook! wrote:

There was slavery and serious discrimination in the North as well. Check your history... then check it twice.

Noah,

Mr Stillwater addressed this when he said that in the north "Free Negroes" were more negro than free.

Regards.

0 Replies

The Secession of Southern States

I guess you didn't list a source because you assumed we were all familiar with this document? I dunno but I'm trying to see what validity such document has in this case. I do recall that there was NO Secession... That would kind of make for a very different history.

Thanks for trying though!
When this Conferderate Constitution becomes law of the land, let me know...

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

Noah's Hard Left Hook! wrote:

There was slavery and serious discrimination in the North as well. Check your history... then check it twice.

Noah,

Mr Stillwater addressed this when he said that in the north "Free Negroes" were more negro than free.

Regards.

Ah!!! NO! Did you miss the word slavery?
I can appreciate the caveat but NO! He is trying to deny Southern "roots" actual or figurative while promoting it [the South's perspective].

Sorry.... but no regards for that!

0 Replies

LOL! I am wondering how much you read people's posts, Noah!

Mr S has already pointed out to you that his roots are way, way further south than you are dreaming of - in a southern continent, in fact...

0 Replies

You recall that there was no secession. ? Explain.

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

LOL! I am wondering how much you read people's posts, Noah!

Mr S has already pointed out to you that his roots are way, way further south than you are dreaming of - in a southern continent, in fact...

The world is just US-AMERICA. Basta.

0 Replies

well you really cant blame Noah for that Walter. Most people use their location lines mostly as a "none of your business" proclamation.
as far as Mr S going postal with noah, it happens. Noah is a good, although sometimes ill informed provocateur.

0 Replies

Quote:

He is trying to deny Southern "roots" actual or figurative while promoting it [the South's perspective].

Okay! When was this Secession completed/finalized? Explain!

0 Replies

cmon noah, lets not rewrite history.

0 Replies

Quote:

Most people use their location lines mostly as a "none of your business" proclamation.

I directed that statement to Craven.... He hasn't indicated that he's from Australia or anywhere other than the U.S. so could you tell me what are you talking about.

And with that clause, if you were quoting me, you definitely misunderstood the context. But I don't blame you... Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

I was talking to walter, thats why i opened with the often overlooked salutation
"well you cant blame that on Noah Walter"
See Walter was the addressee of that, not you Noah.
It is , however, unimportant . Walter was reminding us that different perspectives arrive from different places and many of us are NOT from the US. Although, in this case, if you were addressing Craven, his hearts in Baltimore.

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

cmon noah, lets not rewrite history.

Well, let's get to educating me then. When did the South win? (South Carolina or otherwise?)

0 Replies

Thats not your point. The point you made was that there was no secession. I was curious how you arrove at that pronouncement.

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

I was talking to walter, thats why i opened with the often overlooked salutation
"well you cant blame that on Noah Walter"
See Walter was the addressee of that, not you Noah.
It is , however, unimportant . Walter was reminding us that different perspectives arrive from different places and many of us are NOT from the US. Although, in this case, if you were addressing Craven, his hearts in Baltimore.

And your point?

And what am I "ill informed" about? Your perspective?

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

Thats not your point. The point you made was that there was no secession. I was curious how you arrove at that pronouncement.

We obviously must have two different definitions. When I say or hear Secession, I think of a finalized, permanent act. You can inform me if such a thing occurred. From what I understand that's what the Civil War or War of the States if you prefer was all about.

But then again I don't have "Southern" pride nor do I claim to be a historian about the ways of the South.

So in technical terms I stand corrected but as I see it Secession was not 'successful' and that's why I said there was NO secession. I regard it as an attempt... but I can see how you would call it such. I stand corrected, of course, with that explanation submitted.
_______________________________________

Also, though I'm not at all a stickler on things like this (I don't particularly care as long as I understand what is written) but there is no such word as "ARROVE". I'll count that to your Literary License Account. No Biggie. You got credit as far as I'm concerned. I like creative writing (creative with words not with facts).... Anyway....

0 Replies

geee, you caught that, so your attention to detail isnt lacking. Therefore lets view a date of Dec 20 1860 as an 'act of Secession"
The word "finalized" has no meaning in history.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know