Slavery reparations?

[cheeseburger]

JackBNimble, you are taking what was a very simple statement and clouding it up beyond recognition. Was legal slavery practiced in a large percentage of the country at some point in the past? (after 1790 or whatever?) The answer is yes; end of story. If you are arguing that there never were slaves, (and thus there is no one to compensate), you will have to wait until someone rewrites the history books.

don't feel there is any need to financially compensate a racial group of people for something that happened more than 2 generations before. There is not a single American "trapped in their current situation" as a result of something the US government did to their ancestors three generations ago.

Granted, you are probably right on this. However, one thing still confuses me. You agree there was some wrongdoing on the part of the American Government in endorsing slavery, or allowing its practice. You say financial compensation is innapropriate. What then should 'we' do? If the answer is nothing, then again I disagree with that attitude. If it isn't, what do you propose 'we' do? My 'plan' for repaying the affected parties is in my first or second post here, I won't bore you with it again.

One thing people have evaded directly talking about is the idea of apologizing. This technically is not what the board is about, but I would be very interested in knowing others opinions on this.

[Warbaby1943]

If the answer is nothing, then again I disagree with that attitude. If it isn't, what do you propose 'we' do? My 'plan' for repaying the affected parties is in my first or second post here, I won't bore you with it again.

One thing people have evaded directly talking about is the idea of apologizing. This technically is not what the board is about, but I would be very interested in knowing others opinions on this.

I know you asked for other opinions but I don't think you're going to like this one very much. How about we continue to support all the illegitimate babies with welfare checks for one more generation then we cut that off. Isn't that a form of repayment that we have been doing for ages? I don't consider myself bigoted but all one has to do is look around inside any big city to realize what is happening. We have been making reparations for years, in my opinion, we need do no more.

I personally don't feel anyone today has anything to apologize about but if apologizing would end the resentment, bitterness, and endless cycle of living off of welfare, then I say go for it.

I know there are other ethnic groups that make their living off of welfare also and I believe that must end one day too.

[JackBNimble]

JackBNimble, you are taking what was a very simple statement and clouding it up beyond recognition. Was legal slavery practiced in a large percentage of the country at some point in the past? (after 1790 or whatever?) The answer is yes; end of story. If you are arguing that there never were slaves, (and thus there is no one to compensate), you will have to wait until someone rewrites the history books.

Granted, you are probably right on this. However, one thing still confuses me. You agree there was some wrongdoing on the part of the American Government in endorsing slavery, or allowing its practice. You say financial compensation is innapropriate. What then should 'we' do? If the answer is nothing, then again I disagree with that attitude. If it isn't, what do you propose 'we' do? My 'plan' for repaying the affected parties is in my first or second post here, I won't bore you with it again.

One thing people have evaded directly talking about is the idea of apologizing. This technically is not what the board is about, but I would be very interested in knowing others opinions on this.

Ok, lets take it one step at a time.

No, I don't agree that legal slavery was practiced by anything approaching a large percentage of the country. By no means is it the end of the story. Here are some numbers that support my point.

Prior to and during the Civil War, the great majority of the U.S. population was located in the northern states, where slavery did not exist. In 1860, the total population of the U.S. states where slavery was outlawed was about 19.5 million. The free population of the South was 7.5 million.
Let us take the small minority of Americans living today who had ancestors living in the south. Chances are, those ancestors were not slave owners. Of whites living in the South at that time, only one out of four owned slaves. Only a tiny minority of Americans, therefore, had direct ancestors who were slave owners. At the time of the Civil War, less than 7% of the "white" population of the United States were slave owners. Even if we accepted that every white Southerner was in some way responsible for slavery this would still mean that the vast majority, 68% were still not responsible.

Next, do I agree that there was some wrong-doing by the United States government. This poses an interesting question. At what point does the government become legally responsible and therefore liable for the practices of it's citizens? [As a sidebar, I suspect Isreal would like an answer to this question with respect to Iran, Syria, Saudia Arabia and several other governments]
I would say that if you viewed this as a civil lawsuit against a single slaveowner, then potentially there might have been a case 150 years ago. The statute of limitations has probably run out now though. In addition, unfortunately, The doctrine of “sovereign immunity” essentially holds that the United States government cannot be sued without its consent.

But lets take some more specific questions into mind. You state that you agree reparations should be paid, so then let me ask, by whom?

The U.S. government is a government "by the people, for the people" and not an individual or a corporation. In order for it to pay reparation it would be required to tax some individuals. That being the case, who should pay??

I have a friend who recently became a U.S. citizen. He came to this country from Australia, where he was incidentally an Olympic athlete who won a bronze medal in the pole vault. Certainly as an Australian he never supported slavery, but he is "white". Does he have to pay?? What about my friend who's parents came here from Mexico? She's a U.S. citizen and was born here, but clearly neither she nor her family ever benefited or supported slavery. Does she have to pay??

My own family came to the United States from Ireland and Germany in the late 1800's. My grandmother was born in New York City in 1901. As immigrants from Ireland and Germany at that time they never took part in or benefited from slavery. Do I have to pay??

The point is that it becomes a ridiculous argument. Where would the burden of proof lie? On each person to prove that they weren't responsible for slavery and wouldn't have to pay? And realistically speaking, wouldn't this create a cottage industry of people who could provide effectively "forged" documents to prove such was the case (I mean really, how many of us have documentation that shows where their family has been going back almost 10 generations?)

No, the reality is that slavery and the displacement of the Native American tribes are akin to the "original sins" of the United States, much as the treatment of the Irish people is a similar issue for the people of the U.K. or the Inquisition for Roman Catholics. They're part of history. Not a pretty part, but not something that can be fixed or cured either. Whether we're talking about people of African decent, Mexican decent, Chinese decent...etc, in the end, we're all citizens of the United States of America now. If ever there was a time for people to put aside their "hyphenated origin" and pull together as one people, as citizens of one country, certainly now is the time.

[cheeseburger]

In 1860, the total population of the U.S. states where slavery was outlawed was about 19.5 million. The free population of the South was 7.5 million.

Look, I don't know what youre trying to prove. 7.5/19.5 is about 1/3. The U.S. government knew about the practice of slavery going on in the south. They supported it. There was even an entire buisness based on it.

...?

As soon as you agree with me that the United States of America did something totally inhumane and contrary to just about any civil rights law, its a starting point for an apology.

Again, it is not a personal apology. Let me use a more recent analogy. Hypothetically, *If* The Government supported torture, in say Abu Ghraib, then The Government should apologize. Does that mean that I, a citizen of the U.S., tortured people in my backyard? No. However, they should still apologize.

[JackBNimble]

Look, I don't know what youre trying to prove. 7.5/19.5 is about 1/3. The U.S. government knew about the practice of slavery going on in the south. They supported it. There was even an entire buisness based on it.

...?

As soon as you agree with me that the United States of America did something totally inhumane and contrary to just about any civil rights law, its a starting point for an apology.

Again, it is not a personal apology. Let me use a more recent analogy. Hypothetically, *If* The Government supported torture, in say Abu Ghraib, then The Government should apologize. Does that mean that I, a citizen of the U.S., tortured people in my backyard? No. However, they should still apologize.

You still haven't made your case for blaming either the majority of the people or the government of the United States for slavery so no, I'm not about to agree with you on that point.

In fact you seem to like skip over that part, which must be convenient since if this were a court case that's the section where you'd prove culpability. Instead you seem to want to go straight to punishment.

Umm....clearly math was not your strong suit. Let me help you out here

In this case you had 7.5million Southern whites (but only 25% of those owned slaves so that would be 1.87), and 19.5 million Northern whites....to come up with the percentage you have to first add the two populations together (7.5+19.5=27) to get the total U.S. population at the time. The answer thus is 27 million in total population.
Since what we want to know is what percentage the Southern white slave owners represent of the total, we divide 1.87 by 27 (1.87 million/27 million) which yields .069 or...translated as a percentage, 6.9%. That means that just 6.9% of the population of the United States owned slaves at that time.

Alternatively, you seem to support the concept that ALL southern whites should be held reponsible for slavery(even though 3/4th of them didn't own slaves and some were in fact indentured servants themselves... ). In that case then, take the 7.5 and divide it by 27 and that comes out to 27.7%....which means that either way...again...overwhelmingly the population of the United States did not support slavery (either 93.1% or 72.3% depending on which number you prefer but either way its a huge majority of people who aren't supporting slavery).

Your more recent analogy is most certainly flawed in the following way.

The torture of detainees at Abu Graib was conducted by direct employees of the United States government...the U.S. military, thru the members of the U.S. Army and other branches of service. In this case, obviously the government, thru its officials and officers is responsible for the conduct of its employees.

Nowhere am I aware of any case where the United States government (thru it's officials or officers) either owned or sold slaves or in some way participated in slavery. In fact, in researching, not even any of the anti-slavery or pro-reparations sites can point to a single incident where the U.S. government owned or sold slaves.

That means that in order to make your argument, you're saying that by simply failing to take direct action and stop the practice, the United States government is responsible and therefore should be forced to pay reparations (reparations being a punitive measure under the law).

If that argument is correct, then lets take another recent example. The employees of Enron perpetrated a fraud in which millions of people, both stockholders and employees lost money. The Federal government was aware of this and had thru the Justice Department, FTC and SEC filed suits against them, but under your argument, I should be able to sue the Federal government to recoup my loss because hypthetically they failed to take direct action and seize the company and its assets. That's great because then I'm not responsible for making a bad decision and buying stock, nor is the the company responsible...it's the U.S. government that's responsible because they didn't stop it.

Your argument fails to acknowledge that individuals are responsible for their own conduct unless under direct control or cohersion from some outside force. In the case of Abu Graib, the individual members of the U.S. military are directly responsible for their conduct, but because they operated under the direct control of the U.S. government, the federal government is thus also partially responsible for their conduct.

Individual slave owners were most certainly responsible for their conduct up to the time of the emancipation of the slaves, but they were not in any way being ordered, controlled or forcibly coherced by the federal government to own or use slaves. Therefore, the U.S. federal government should not be held responsible for their actions.

Incidentally, you failed to answer any of my questions regarding who's going to pay the reparations you so vehemently support.

[cheeseburger]

Jack, with all due respect, the fact remains slavery was practiced in the United States and the government knew about it. The rest is fluff.

Incidentally, you failed to answer any of my questions regarding who's going to pay the reparations you so vehemently support.

We have a pretty big budget, and the #1 place we spend money on could do with a bit of downsizing. This is a topic for a whole new debate.

[_ID_]

We have a pretty big budget, and the #1 place we spend money on could do with a bit of downsizing. This is a topic for a whole new debate.

Just so I am clear on what your implying, could you clarify? I am wondering what topic we could debate on next.

This discussion has be educational for me, as well as a passionate thread.

V/R
ID

[JackBNimble]

Jack, with all due respect, the fact remains slavery was practiced in the United States and the government knew about it. The rest is fluff.
We have a pretty big budget, and the #1 place we spend money on could do with a bit of downsizing. This is a topic for a whole new debate.

So it seems I'm correct. You have no valid rationale for why one group of people should receive monetary reparations except that according to you some individuals 150 years ago did something wrong. Therefore by your logic another class of people who have done nothing wrong today should be required to pay for that...except of course, because you say so. The lack of logic you've shown and failure to provide any explanation for your position pretty well dooms your argument though.

Well....I'd have to agree it's a pretty big budget, but why do you want to go taking money away from Medicare, Medicaid the NIH, the FDA and the other programs from the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS)? http://www.federalbudget.com/chart.gif

With all due respect, you really ought to do some research so you know what the heck you're talking about before engaging in debate.