makes my blood boil..........

wiscoaster

Well-known member
It is nice that you, theotherwaldo, wiscoaster are saying that we should ignore race. But, the damage was done in the name of race and we can't just turn around now and say, 'oh, right, we should ignore race, after all'. The harm has already been inflicted. There is a group that has suffered economic impacts from racist policies, and much like to the Japanese Americans, we owe a debt.
If you can identify WHO was harmed and what the monetary VALUE of that harm done is today, then ya, of course, JUSTICE for the harmed parties is usually done by way of compensation for the value of the harm done. Just throwing free money at all persons of certain approved skin colors today is not justice, it's not reparations, it's not even atonement for the parties that did the harm, it's actually a form of RACISM, in my humble and colorless opinion.
 
Last edited:

roscoe

Active member
If you can identify WHO was harmed and what the monetary VALUE of that harm done is today, then ya, of course, JUSTICE for the harmed parties is usually done by way of compensation for the value of the harm done. Just throwing free money at all persons of certain approved skin colors today is not justice, it's not reparations, it's not even atonement for the parties that did the harm, it's actually a form of RACISM, in my humble and colorless opinion.

So, as long as we can identify the actual victim? Because that is not hard - there are plenty of records of harm done to currently living Americans, and even that modest proposal has been rejected.

So, I actually don't think that the objection has to do with whether or not we can identify who was harmed and how. People just don't want to do the right thing for the same old reasons.
 

roscoe

Active member

Plenty of living Black Americans can show actual harm caused - Authorine Lucy, who tried to get an education at the University of Alabama and whose acceptance (based on merit) was rescinded when they discovered she was Black: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autherine_Lucy

You are telling me she can't show actual harm comparable to what the Japanese-Americans suffered? And she is obviously the tip of the iceberg. There are plenty of past records of mortgages denied, block-busting, etc., on still-living American citizens. All clear economic harm, caused by racism, on people who are still alive today.
 

wiscoaster

Well-known member
...There are plenty of past records of mortgages denied, block-busting, etc., on still-living American citizens. All clear economic harm, caused by racism, on people who are still alive today.
Where actual damages to living persons can be documented then I think justice demands damage awards to those person on that basis - but not on the basis of their genes. And let's call it damages and not reparations or some other emotion-laden BS.
 

theotherwaldo

Well-known member
-And I was refused certain occupational opportunities and was not allowed entrance into certain schools because I was not a member of a recognized minority - so I had to go to the University of Alabama... .
Ironic, isn't it?
 

roscoe

Active member
Where actual damages to living persons can be documented then I think justice demands damage awards to those person on that basis - but not on the basis of their genes. And let's call it damages and not reparations or some other emotion-laden BS.

Man, how many times to I have to repeat myself? It is not on the basis of their genes. The original prejudicial acts were done on the basis of genes, reparations are based on the actions.

A recent immigrant from the Ivory Coast with identical genes to a citizen of Evanston, Illinois does not qualify for the city's reparations.
 

roscoe

Active member
I figure that if my ancestors' sacrifice of two brothers and a life changing wound fighting for the Union under General Sherman isn't enough to correct the wrong done then someone wants too much and deserves a lot less.

Again, this is not about slavery. It is about Jim Crow, segregation, and denied economic opportunities after the Civil War, when the 14th Amendment made all freed slaves US citizens. I also lost family members fighting for the Union cause, but that is not the question.

At issue is - who paid for the black businesses burned by the race riots in Tulsa? Who pays for the lost educational opportunities, like those of Authorice Lucy (above)? Who paid for the lost economic opportunities caused by redlining and refusal for home and business loans by southern banks?

As it stands now, only the victims of the racism have paid for it. How is that remotely fair or moral?
 

theotherwaldo

Well-known member
Who paid for the businesses and homes burned or looted by BLM and Antifa over the last few years?
Many of these homes and businesses were owned by Blacks and other recognized minorities.
Likewise, who paid for the arson and vandalism from the last several riots in Los Angeles and many of the other Democrat-run cities over the last fifty or sixty years?
Most of the rioters in these riots were Blacks (and other opportunists)... .
 

roscoe

Active member
Who paid for the businesses and homes burned or looted by BLM and Antifa over the last few years?
Many of these homes and businesses were owned by Blacks and other recognized minorities.
Likewise, who paid for the arson and vandalism from the last several riots in Los Angeles and many of the other Democrat-run cities over the last fifty or sixty years?
Most of the rioters in these riots were Blacks (and other opportunists)... .

Are you honestly comparing a few incidents over the last few years to 150 years of voter suppression, lynchings, state-sanctioned segregation, and economic repression? Nothing you listed even compares to the single incident in Tulsa.

And more fundamentally, none of what you listed counts as state-sanctioned oppression. That is the crux of the whole thing - it was the government (local and state, mostly) who did the oppressing, which is why those governments are liable for the moral and economic debt. No one is looking for money from a racist rabble like the Charlottesville morons. The KKK and the Tulsa mobs, as well as other instances in the early 20th century were assisted and encouraged by local law enforcement and governments.
 
Last edited:

roscoe

Active member
And if you really want to know what it really is: it's buying votes, plain and simple, and that's illegal under U.S. election laws.
I hope you do see the flaw in this statement. Aren't politicians buying votes each and every time they pass pork-barrel legislation or have an earmark set aside for their district? I recollect a bridge to nowhere proposed by Republicans in Alaska . . .

But more fundamentally, this is only a 'partisan' issue because the Republicans oppose it. If they were smart (unlikely these days, I know), they would just get out in front, propose a college scholarship and home/small business loan fund, apologize on behalf of the relevant governments (if they represent those states) and simultaneously do the right thing and try to win back some Black voters. Alas, this is unlikely.
 
Last edited:

wiscoaster

Well-known member
... Aren't politicians buying votes each and every time they pass pork-barrel legislation or have an earmark set aside for their district?
Of course, and that's not a flaw in my statement, it supports it as yet another instance of government throwing unearned and undeserved money at people, in return for which they hope to receive their undying love and support and (of course) their votes in the next election.
 

roscoe

Active member
Of course, and that's not a flaw in my statement, it supports it as yet another instance of government throwing unearned and undeserved money at people, in return for which they hope to receive their undying love and support and (of course) their votes in the next election.

Republicans have always supported as much pork-barrel and earmark shenanigans as Democrats. But they are very strongly opposed to reparations. See the disconnect?
 
Top