Should we pass H.R. 40 reparations for chattel slavery?

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Yes, because past injustices and historic tramua influence the present.

Chattel slavery brought an enormous amount of wealth into the United States.Just as redlining harms Black people not only in the past when it was legal, but has lingering effects today. In order to have equality of opportunity we must make reparations for historic trauma.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/

Bogan

If you think that the descendants of criminals should be punished up to the 10th generation, Dreamer, you must be a fundamentalist Christian.     Do you still want witches burned too?

MichaelElpers

@Dreamer

How far back do we need to go...to the beginning of time? Have fun trying to find all of the injustices.

There is no way you can figure out on an individual level how much a single individual lost or gained due to historic injustice.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Finding all the injustices is not nessacary.

@MichaelElpers

I am only suggesting acknowledging chattel slavery. We would only need to go back to 1776 or so when chattel slavery was widespread. Due to compound interest and inter-generational wealth white families have huge advantages over Black. Your argument is a slippery slope argument.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Again, with the white victimhood.

@Bogan

In your mind racial equity = oppression of white people. Reparations might help white people. All that guilt over slavery could finally be erased. Better relationships with Black people.

just_sayin

Argument Topic: No one today is responsible for actions over 150 years ago.

@Dreamer:
No one is arguing that slavery was ethically good- well, except for LeBron James whose shoes are still made by slaves today.  It is ethically immoral to demand that people today pay reparations for something people did 150 years ago.  No one is responsible for the actions of their ancestors.  Further, only about 5 percent of the US population even has ancestors who had slaves.  I know that all white people look alike, but to follow the logic of those demanding reparations you would have to believe that "whiteness" is some spaceless timeless amalgam of all white people where what someone you think is white today can be blamed for what someone who was white was guilty of years ago.  If this were legal, then these cases would have been tried in a court.  They aren't legal or just, and that's why they haven't been.

Further, white people and Asians have been discriminated against for about 50 years due to Affirmative Action policies.  They were told this racist policy was necessary to make up for past discrimination.  It is not only unjust to discriminate against white and Asian people today through racist Affirmative action policies which discriminate against people based on their race in college admissions, getting a job, being awarded grants, and government contracts, but to on top of this racism, to then demand that the people which have been discriminated against by Systemic racism have to pay reparations for things they did not do is the high of immorality.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: White people benefit from white priviledge and systemic racism.

 Reparations is about equality of opportunity, not punishing white people.  White people benefit in all sorts of ways from white privilege as seen in below 3 min video.

As for affirmative action, Black sounding names get 50% less callbacks from resumes.

just_sayin

Argument Topic: If White Privilege were real...

If white privilege were real then every poor child in Appalachia would save up every penny she could and go to Piggly Wiggly or Walmart and buy some.  Only the most anti-intellect person would dare say that a poor white child in Appalachia living in a single wide trailer with one parent has more privilege than a Black child whose parents are professors at Harvard.  Anyone who says that they can determine what privileges someone has just because they are a certain race, has accepted a blatantly racist ideology, and  has embraced a racist mindset.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Your denying white priviledge.

There is classism which can confound the issue. Yes, rural hinterlands tend to be poor and cities rich. Not everyone agrees but it is possible for a Black person to have more privilege than a white person especially when intersectionality occurs.Yet, white privilege exists.

A poor white permanently disabled female versus an able bodied rich Black male. For example the Black person will probably have to suffer micro-aggressions and everyone assuming he is a janitor for example.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SayHerName

In the same situation though a Black women would struggled more. For example sayhername shows how Black women are targeted by police violence.

just_sayin

Argument Topic: CRT is racism

@Dreamer
It is important to call out racist notions and beliefs where ever they are found.  Even though only 2 of the 36+ so called CRT bills even mentioned CRT, the label stuck.  These bills sought to provide legal protections to children who were being forced to affirm racist ideologies in the classroom.  The following is a list, directly from the Florida bill, that identifies discriminatory mindsets that children may not be forced to affirm.

1. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin are
   52  morally superior to members of another race, color, sex, or
   53  national origin.
   54         2. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
   55  or national origin, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive,
   56  whether consciously or unconsciously.
   57         3. An individual’s moral character or status as either
   58  privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by his or her
   59  race, color, sex, or national origin.
   60         4. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin
   61  cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to
   62  race, color, sex, or national origin.
   63         5. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
   64  or national origin, bears responsibility for, or should be
   65  discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of,
   66  actions committed in the past by other members of the same race,
   67  color, sex, or national origin.
   68         6. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
   69  or national origin, should be discriminated against or receive
   70  adverse treatment to achieve diversity, equity, or inclusion.
   71         7. An individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or
   72  any other form of psychological distress on account of his or
   73  her race, color, sex, or national origin.
   74         8. Such virtues as merit, excellence, hard work, fairness,
   75  neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness are racist or
   76  sexist, or were created by members of a particular race, color,
   77  sex, or national origin to oppress members of another race,
   78  color, sex, or national origin.
   79         (b) Paragraph (a) may not be construed to prohibit
   80  discussion of the concepts listed therein as part of a course of
   81  training or instruction, provided such training or instruction
   82  is given in an objective manner without endorsement of the
   83  concepts.

So many of the notions being championed for by some on the left are addressed in these bills - such as the bigoted notion that you can know someone's privileges, attitudes, character, or moral status by the color they are.  Some of these very same ideologies have been pushed in this thread.   Notice that the bolded concepts are racist concepts that users on this very site have brought up in the last 24 hours alone.

The inability to see people as individuals, and instead see them only as part of a racial group, is a large part of the problem of the ideologies associated with CRT.  

I am curious which of the prohibited notions do you think should be inculcated into children?

John_C_87

@just_sayin

No one is responsible for the actions of their ancestors. 
You do know that salvory was inavetantly made a United States Consitutional right by ratification of the states in Ameerica to which it not only happend in the past but takes place in present time as well?

13 Amendment.

Section 1.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

13th Amendment | U.S. Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)

John_C_87

@Dreamer

Again, how are those families who have paid reparations accounted for?

As it stands bigotry and prejudice are simply hate that had been fueled and speared uncontrollably by the use of a language of law as the lower for of legislation became more popular publicly than United States Constitutional Right. Then fueling the imperfect state of the union between established justice and the other state of the union described as specification in American Constitutional preamble.

The House of Representatives then goes on to ratify the ideas of imperfect writings of law into United States Constitutional Right by 13th Amendment. It is really hard not to simply see this as a legal strategy to stall and hold the legal process from the argument of slavery becoming bound by a series of self-evident truths connected to acts it as a right to War as a state of the union found as United States Constitutional Right. Keep in mind this does not mean the act of slavery is right It is only describing that it can be held inalienable to the one action of War and nothing else including acts of Congress as the 13 Amendment implicitly implies as a power.

MichaelElpers

@Dreamer

It's not a slippery slope because your entire argument centers around settling past injustices because they impact the present. Can't that argument be made for all injustices?
You are giving special treatment only to certain people and injustices you find relevant.

This is not to mention that although there definetly were injustices, I find the argument to be bad for a number of reasons.

1. Everyone is born under different circumstances. To provide a wealthy black individual reparations while ignoring a poor kid of any other race seems pretty to me. It is important to provide an escape from perverts for anyone currently or born into it.  That is not done by proving a couple thousand dollars.

2. Many of the people today aren't responsible for the past injustices. You are creating an injustice by penalizing individuals who you cannot prove have done anything wrong nor may they have earned any addional wealth.  This bill is really a collectively racist idea.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Critical Race Theory is anti-racist not racist.

@just_sayin

I find interesting how people twist an anti-racist argument and label it racist. Critical race theory is not being taught in schools.

In fact, people who recommend critical race theory think it should be taught in college. Yes, the white students may feel uncomfortable about Christopher Columbus being a murderous moron who never set foot in America. Or the brutality of chattel slavery. None of this is racist, in fact it is anti-racist teachings.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Historic tramua is real.

@MichaelElpers

"Historical Trauma (HT), or Historical Trauma Response (HTR), can manifest itself in a variety of psychological ways. However, it is most commonly seen through high rates of substance abuse, alcoholism, depression, anxiety, suicide, domestic violence, and abuse within afflicted communities."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_trauma

Here's the problem with your argument. Let's say we ignore historic trauma and basically say let the past be in the past. Then, the conservative media and pundits will point to the high rate of alcoholism and domestic violence in minoritized, racialized, and often invisibilized communities and blame the victim. Compounding the damage.

just_sayin

@Dreamer
Critical Race Theory is being taught in schools.  I hope you will take the word of the Superintendent of Schools in the city of Detroit:

“Our curriculum is deeply using critical race theory especially in social studies, but you’ll find it in English language arts and the other disciplines,” said Superintendent Nikolai Vitti during a school board meeting...

It that isn't enough evidence for you here are few other articles:

TEACHERS’ UNION TACITLY ADMITS CRT IS IN OKLAHOMA SCHOOLS

NEA social justice trainer admits critical race theory in K-12 despite claims by union boss Becky Pringle

Teachers’ Unions Vow to Defend Members in Critical Race Theory Fight

Major K-12 Teachers Union Endorses Teaching Critical Race Theory

CRT In Class: Local school district admits lessons on race, gender, and privilege were potentially biased

Yes, Virginia, critical race theory is in K-12.

I'm not interested in arguing about CRT.  Its like nailing Jell-O to a wall.  The first rule of CRT club is to deny that CRT club exists.  People just say "that's not what CRT teaches".  Instead, like the state bills, I'd rather focus on the 12 or 13 racist beliefs that are being taught in the classroom.

It is a straw man argument to claim that the hub-bub about CRT in schools is about whitewashing history.  The bills do not prohibit the teaching of any event of history, in fact, it mandates the teaching of historical injustices like slavery and the holocaust.  Again this is about the racist beliefs kids are being forced to affirm:

• That one race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;
• An individual, solely by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive;
• An individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex;
• A meritocracy is inherently racist or sexist;
• Particular character traits, values, moral or ethical codes, privileges, or beliefs should be ascribed to a race or sex, or to an individual because of the individual's race or sex

So tell me, which of the beliefs above do you think kids should be made to affirm?

MichaelElpers

@Dreamer

Suicide is generally more prevalent in the upper class.

I'm not suggesting we ignore things we've done wrong in the past because that would keep us from learning from them.  However I think it is also to steal from individuals who were not involved in injustice and give it to those who may not be effected by it.

Creating a victimhood culture is far less empowering and much more likely to keep people in poverty than pointing out issues and having people take responsibility.

John_C_87

@MichaelElpers
I'm not suggesting we ignore things we've done wrong in the past because that would keep us from learning from them.  However I think it is also to steal from individuals who were not involved in injustice and give it to those who may not be effected by it.

Injustice? Slavery was not a question of injustice, there was a chance for America to apply a Constitutional connection to established justice with slavery, it was never taken till well after the fact. As fact the cause is not even argue before the courts or classes today. Before a slave was to be imported as a regestard value of debt the court would need to rule on immigration status of the salve. However, the plea for action by the people was by all fact a question of the use of excessive human cruelty imposed on another due to the weaponization of debt connected to anger on a global scale.

To be specific in an argument of whole truth the abilities of one person or a group of people to utilize, direct, then apply the sue of debt as a weapon against group of people was and still is the argument before established justice. Should a political band make such as a Parliament or Congress pass any act of legislation to distribute debt to pay reparations for an act claimed by Congress to be something only congress itself can perform by law?

The aswer would be no. "Malpratice of law."

The reason is that Congress would need to hire legal council as reprentation in court as congress is asking members to make an admission of guilt against itslef. 

Pepsiguy

Argument Topic: These race grifters should stop!!!

Seriously, institutional racism simply does not exist in America today. The south has changed. The North had almost no "institutional" racism throughout its history. The blacks who suffered under slavery are all dead now, they have been dead for decade(shttps://www.bbc.com/news/education-52010859 ), and we don't have the power to communicate with them to ask what they would do about. The only problems affecting blacks today are cultural and the people who created those problems are the same who wrote the bill:

http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=faolY5_hnIc
http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl7Q36V9pg4&list=TLPQMDQwMTIwMjNHiXnLoT2kSA&index=2
http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_a7dQXilCo
http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=OURy5WFp0zk&t=38s
http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=09dqD1KbOPc
http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChVtq7NCO1M&t=62s
http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiprVX4os2Y
http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htm8TuB-5Hc
http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThRb9x-RieI

So no, blacks don't need to reparations. In order for blacks to transcend their current conditions they must:

* not fornicate
* Work hard
* form stable, traditional, nuclear families so that their kids can grow healthily
* complete high school
* take responsibility for their actions
* be creative and innovate
* etc

MayCaesar

"Racial equity" is a fundamentally racist idea. To see why that is, imagine a world in which no racism of any kind exists. In this world one's "race" does not determine their social standing in any way: it is just a superficial feature, like the nail length or the hair color. What certainly does NOT happen in this world is splitting of people into arbitrary categories such as "race", comparing subjective metrics of "success" between these categories, and advocating for different treatment of people belonging to different categories in the name of equality.

"Racial equity" does just that. It is no less racist than the Soviet persecution of Jews was anti-semitic: they also justified it by considerations of equality, fairness and justice, pointing out how privileged the Russian jews historically were and how now they have to disproportionally contribute to the social welfare to atone for their ancestors' sins.

How ideologues on the West managed to sell their racism as anti-racism to the public I have no idea. Suffice to say, I was deeply disappointed upon moving here yo discover that racism in America is alive and well - and is championed ironically by those who claim to be staunch anti-racists.

Every time you say that someone deserves or does not deserve X because of their race, you are contributing to the problem you claim to be fighting against.