Democrats and Reparations

[Epic Beard Man]

Upon reading some stuff at work (of course while on break) I was reading about the discussions regarding Democratic candidates opening up the discussion of reparations for black Americans. Interesting enough the discussion of course on different political platforms evolved into inflammatory discussions.

I like the answer (in question form) that Bernie Sanders gave when asked whether he endorsed reparations for the descendants of African slaves he said "what does that mean?"

It has come to my attention that several Democratic presidential candidates are endorsing the idea of reparations for the descendants of slaves these include: Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Marianne Williamson. In a telephone discussion with a former school mate of mine concerning the subject, she approved of the idea of reparations as a means of closing the economic gap that many black Americans have far too long have staggered behind in time. All the false promises like 40 acres and a mule (which was never paid), Jim Crow, discriminatory housing practices etcetera have all played in affect, the stagnation of economic equality between black and white Americans. She further argued that abolishment of slavery did not reset opportunity for social and economical equality, and the systems that existed after slavery perpetuated racism which prevented equitable opportunity for people of color. In addition she stated to me that black Americans were impacted by federal housing laws and even today these laws in part are still in effect.

To put this in context for you guys my mother during her time could not live in any neighborhood and most certainly she had to live in areas where it was populated by predominately blacks. the value of home ownership in comparison to white home ownership is less even when crime was very low. The very fact that people were of a different skin pigmentation sets a particular value for the housing market and it still continues still this day. I then asked her how she felt regarding the pushback in social commentary Ben Shiparo came to mind. She said:

"When white Americans talk about why should I pay for something I was not involved in? I tell them why do we as taxpayers fund wars we do not completely believe in? Or what about African-Americans Latinos, Native Americans paying for reparations for the Japanese in the 1980's?"

Sounds compelling she further added:

"I take issue for those arguing against reparations focusing on the history of slavery and not take into consideration the subsequent discriminatory experiences faced by black Americans. 243 years of slavery, 10 to 12 years of reconstruction, 19 years of Jim Crow all the way until 1970 as the marker, blacks were technically free for 49 years. To add to this the Fair Housing Act was passed because it was filibustered for three years and MLK had to be assassinated for the House to pass it. When whites ask how they would feel about reparations to blacks, I tell them to ask the descendants of Rosewood and Black Wall street and how racism destroyed affluent black communities. There were blacks who owned hundreds of acres of land and had to abandon them due to the KKK threatening them with lynching even though police were present during those times (police are considered as government entities) smart Democrats see this."

Ultimately what I see that is problematic when it comes to Democrats pandering the idea of reparations is that psychologically we do not live in a society that is ready to recognize its sins and ready to close the gap because I firmly believe there are people that fear competition. I believe given the opportunity and if all things were reset equally with equal opportunities without discriminatory practices black Americans would be very successful. Unfortunately in my lifetime this society is not ready to acknowledge generations of discrimination which affected generations of people over time. Gentrification, redlining, all played a part in dismantling black economic growth that no Democrat will be able to fix, at least not in my lifetime.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I doubt reparations would do much, largely because the problems you highlighted would still exist. Seems more of a "wanna-be bandaid" fix in hopes of ignoring the real problems to brush them under the rug and leave it for someone else to clean up. But that is the assumption that reparations means giving out cash. Addressing schools that are a joke with funds you can't even joke about that plague black communities, community programs to increase business ownership within both the ethnic and physical communities, programs to reduce violence and drugs, I can see that going much further if that's what reparations means. But it could also easily be made into the position that such a thing falls under "promoting the general welfare of the public."

"When white Americans talk about why should I pay for something I was not involved in? I tell them why do we as taxpayers fund wars we do not completely believe in? Or what about African-Americans Latinos, Native Americans paying for reparations for the Japanese in the 1980's?"

Sounds compelling she further added:

I don't really see that as compelling, as many will equally extend the sentiment towards wars and war reparations. It brings to mind Nozick's concept of "just acquisition," and the problem even he acknowledged with it and that is the question of how far back can we go before just becomes unjust? I've known many who are equally against reparations and blowing a place up and rebuilding it. Of course though we pay for a ton of things, through taxes, we have no involvement in. But when and where is it no longer significant?
And, yeah. It is a valid question of why do we fund wars we don't support and pay reparations to countries even though hardly anyone still alive had anything to do with it? Such as, should the grandchildren of Nazis still really be expected to bear the WWII war reparations?

 

[wellwisher]

Most of the atrocities done to the blacks were done by the Democrats. The Civil War was between the Democrats and the Republicans, with President Lincoln a Republican. The Republicans have been helping the blacks, against the Democrats, since the time of Lincoln, for over 160 years.

In 1860 very few people owned slaves. Slaves were not cheap to buy or the own. Below is USA census from 1860. About 8% of the white population owned slaves, with the nearly 100% of this in the South. This was connected to agriculture. The South was Democrat.
1860 Census Results

If you look at 21st century statistics, the worse places to live, today, for the blacks, in terms of violence, drugs, poverty, poor education and lack of jobs is in cities controlled by the Democrats; Chicago, New York, Newark, Baltimore, Atlanta, etc., This has not changed in 160 years.

Some Democrats started to help the blacks, say 60 years ago, after 100 years of persecution, after the Emancipation Proclamation. This 100 year span is when the Democrats committed their worse atrocities such as from the KKK. If you do the math, the Democrats have the largest tab when it comes to reparations. However, they are trying to hide their shady past and pretend the Republicans are in the same boat and owe the same, simply for being white.

The patented Democrat freebie giveaway scam is played every electron cycle. If you add all the promised giveaways by the latest crop of Democrat candidates is adds to over $20 trillion. They try to buy votes, with promises they never keep. Their base falls for it every time.

Reparations are being promoted, by Democrat candidness, in a way that does not do justice to the real bullies of the blacks; Democrats from 1830-1950. The contemporary Democrat leadership knows this is being unfair. They also know this means the Republicans will resist the deal being offered in attempt to make this fair. The Democrats will then spin this resistance, so they can blame the Republicans for no Reparations. The goal is to trick the blacks to vote for their captures; Democrat Party based Stockholm syndrome. This way they can recycle reparations, again and again, each election cycle, while never having to doing anything. If it was serious, the Democrats would have to admit their shady past and man up for their 100 years of terror. They owe 90%, minimum.

The analogy for the reparation scam is I tell the kids in the neighborhood, that they deserve a fun summer. The kids agree with me. I then offer the kids the opportunity to swim in a nice swimming pool all summer. This pool is not mine, to offer. It belongs to Mr Jones. I have worded the scam to get credit for something that cannot happen, and I then use Mr Jones as the scapegoat, for this not happening. I will not tell the kids this was scam, so they will still continue to give me credit and hate Mr Jones.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Upon reading some stuff at work (of course while on break) I was reading about the discussions regarding Democratic candidates opening up the discussion of reparations for black Americans. Interesting enough the discussion of course on different political platforms evolved into inflammatory discussions.

I like the answer (in question form) that Bernie Sanders gave when asked whether he endorsed reparations for the descendants of African slaves he said "what does that mean?"

It has come to my attention that several Democratic presidential candidates are endorsing the idea of reparations for the descendants of slaves these include: Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Marianne Williamson. In a telephone discussion with a former school mate of mine concerning the subject, she approved of the idea of reparations as a means of closing the economic gap that many black Americans have far too long have staggered behind in time. All the false promises like 40 acres and a mule (which was never paid), Jim Crow, discriminatory housing practices etcetera have all played in affect, the stagnation of economic equality between black and white Americans. She further argued that abolishment of slavery did not reset opportunity for social and economical equality, and the systems that existed after slavery perpetuated racism which prevented equitable opportunity for people of color. In addition she stated to me that black Americans were impacted by federal housing laws and even today these laws in part are still in effect.

To put this in context for you guys my mother during her time could not live in any neighborhood and most certainly she had to live in areas where it was populated by predominately blacks. the value of home ownership in comparison to white home ownership is less even when crime was very low. The very fact that people were of a different skin pigmentation sets a particular value for the housing market and it still continues still this day. I then asked her how she felt regarding the pushback in social commentary Ben Shiparo came to mind. She said:

"When white Americans talk about why should I pay for something I was not involved in? I tell them why do we as taxpayers fund wars we do not completely believe in? Or what about African-Americans Latinos, Native Americans paying for reparations for the Japanese in the 1980's?"

Sounds compelling she further added:

"I take issue for those arguing against reparations focusing on the history of slavery and not take into consideration the subsequent discriminatory experiences faced by black Americans. 243 years of slavery, 10 to 12 years of reconstruction, 19 years of Jim Crow all the way until 1970 as the marker, blacks were technically free for 49 years. To add to this the Fair Housing Act was passed because it was filibustered for three years and MLK had to be assassinated for the House to pass it. When whites ask how they would feel about reparations to blacks, I tell them to ask the descendants of Rosewood and Black Wall street and how racism destroyed affluent black communities. There were blacks who owned hundreds of acres of land and had to abandon them due to the KKK threatening them with lynching even though police were present during those times (police are considered as government entities) smart Democrats see this."

Ultimately what I see that is problematic when it comes to Democrats pandering the idea of reparations is that psychologically we do not live in a society that is ready to recognize its sins and ready to close the gap because I firmly believe there are people that fear competition. I believe given the opportunity and if all things were reset equally with equal opportunities without discriminatory practices black Americans would be very successful. Unfortunately in my lifetime this society is not ready to acknowledge generations of discrimination which affected generations of people over time. Gentrification, redlining, all played a part in dismantling black economic growth that no Democrat will be able to fix, at least not in my lifetime.

Blacks want reparations? Establish a sovereign reservation.

 

[Stevicus]

Upon reading some stuff at work (of course while on break) I was reading about the discussions regarding Democratic candidates opening up the discussion of reparations for black Americans. Interesting enough the discussion of course on different political platforms evolved into inflammatory discussions.

I like the answer (in question form) that Bernie Sanders gave when asked whether he endorsed reparations for the descendants of African slaves he said "what does that mean?"

It has come to my attention that several Democratic presidential candidates are endorsing the idea of reparations for the descendants of slaves these include: Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Marianne Williamson. In a telephone discussion with a former school mate of mine concerning the subject, she approved of the idea of reparations as a means of closing the economic gap that many black Americans have far too long have staggered behind in time. All the false promises like 40 acres and a mule (which was never paid), Jim Crow, discriminatory housing practices etcetera have all played in affect, the stagnation of economic equality between black and white Americans. She further argued that abolishment of slavery did not reset opportunity for social and economical equality, and the systems that existed after slavery perpetuated racism which prevented equitable opportunity for people of color. In addition she stated to me that black Americans were impacted by federal housing laws and even today these laws in part are still in effect.

To put this in context for you guys my mother during her time could not live in any neighborhood and most certainly she had to live in areas where it was populated by predominately blacks. the value of home ownership in comparison to white home ownership is less even when crime was very low. The very fact that people were of a different skin pigmentation sets a particular value for the housing market and it still continues still this day. I then asked her how she felt regarding the pushback in social commentary Ben Shiparo came to mind. She said:

"When white Americans talk about why should I pay for something I was not involved in? I tell them why do we as taxpayers fund wars we do not completely believe in? Or what about African-Americans Latinos, Native Americans paying for reparations for the Japanese in the 1980's?"

Sounds compelling she further added:

"I take issue for those arguing against reparations focusing on the history of slavery and not take into consideration the subsequent discriminatory experiences faced by black Americans. 243 years of slavery, 10 to 12 years of reconstruction, 19 years of Jim Crow all the way until 1970 as the marker, blacks were technically free for 49 years. To add to this the Fair Housing Act was passed because it was filibustered for three years and MLK had to be assassinated for the House to pass it. When whites ask how they would feel about reparations to blacks, I tell them to ask the descendants of Rosewood and Black Wall street and how racism destroyed affluent black communities. There were blacks who owned hundreds of acres of land and had to abandon them due to the KKK threatening them with lynching even though police were present during those times (police are considered as government entities) smart Democrats see this."

Ultimately what I see that is problematic when it comes to Democrats pandering the idea of reparations is that psychologically we do not live in a society that is ready to recognize its sins and ready to close the gap because I firmly believe there are people that fear competition. I believe given the opportunity and if all things were reset equally with equal opportunities without discriminatory practices black Americans would be very successful. Unfortunately in my lifetime this society is not ready to acknowledge generations of discrimination which affected generations of people over time. Gentrification, redlining, all played a part in dismantling black economic growth that no Democrat will be able to fix, at least not in my lifetime.

I support reparations and other such proposals to address and acknowledge the gross injustices and atrocities in our past.

However, I'm not so certain that it's simply a matter of society not being ready to acknowledge generations of discrimination. From what I've seen, society does acknowledge and recognize what happened in the past, but as a society, we've been remiss in taking a good, honest look at the causes and effects of history.

Part of the problem is that there are too many "sacred cows" in the American political consciousness which would have to be challenged and torn down, if we were to take a truly honest and reproving look at our history and the structure of our society.

 

[Revoltingest]

Most of the atrocities done to the blacks were done by the Democrats. The Civil War was between the Democrats and the Republicans, with President Lincoln a Republican. The Republicans have been helping the blacks, against the Democrats, since the time of Lincoln, for over 160 years.

In 1860 very few people owned slaves. Slaves were not cheap to buy or the own. Below is USA census from 1860. About 8% of the white population owned slaves, with the nearly 100% of this in the South. This was connected to agriculture. The South was Democrat.
1860 Census Results

If you look at 21st century statistics, the worse places to live, today, for the blacks, in terms of violence, drugs, poverty, poor education and lack of jobs is in cities controlled by the Democrats; Chicago, New York, Newark, Baltimore, Atlanta, etc., This has not changed in 160 years.

Some Democrats started to help the blacks, say 60 years ago, after 100 years of persecution, after the Emancipation Proclamation. This 100 year span is when the Democrats committed their worse atrocities such as from the KKK. If you do the math, the Democrats have the largest tab when it comes to reparations. However, they are trying to hide their shady past and pretend the Republicans are in the same boat and owe the same, simply for being white.

The patented Democrat freebie giveaway scam is played every electron cycle. If you add all the promised giveaways by the latest crop of Democrat candidates is adds to over $20 trillion. They try to buy votes, with promises they never keep. Their base falls for it every time.

Reparations are being promoted, by Democrat candidness, in a way that does not do justice to the real bullies of the blacks; Democrats from 1830-1950. The contemporary Democrat leadership knows this is being unfair. They also know this means the Republicans will resist the deal being offered in attempt to make this fair. The Democrats will then spin this resistance, so they can blame the Republicans for no Reparations. The goal is to trick the blacks to vote for their captures; Democrat Party based Stockholm syndrome. This way they can recycle reparations, again and again, each election cycle, while never having to doing anything. If it was serious, the Democrats would have to admit their shady past and man up for their 100 years of terror. They owe 90%, minimum.

The analogy for the reparation scam is I tell the kids in the neighborhood, that they deserve a fun summer. The kids agree with me. I then offer the kids the opportunity to swim in a nice swimming pool all summer. This pool is not mine, to offer. It belongs to Mr Jones. I have worded the scam to get credit for something that cannot happen, and I then use Mr Jones as the scapegoat, for this not happening. I will not tell the kids this was scam, so they will still continue to give me credit and hate Mr Jones.

Let the DNC pay reparations.
I certainly don't want it coming out of my tax payments.
1) My family didn't come down out of the trees to immigrate to Ameristan til after the Civil War.
2) With their complaints not resolved by reparations, they'll keep complaining anyway.
3) Those injured by slavery are only distant ancestors.
4) It treats individuals as merely members of a group, with no consideration of personal circumstances.

I don't trust these Dems who promise reparations.
They're just manipulating weak & eager minds.
Dems promise gifts, knowing that Congress will never grant them.
It's cheap & easy trickery.
Regarding Amerindians, it would be fair to just honor treaties which gov has violated.

 

[BSM1]

Upon reading some stuff at work (of course while on break) I was reading about the discussions regarding Democratic candidates opening up the discussion of reparations for black Americans. Interesting enough the discussion of course on different political platforms evolved into inflammatory discussions.

I like the answer (in question form) that Bernie Sanders gave when asked whether he endorsed reparations for the descendants of African slaves he said "what does that mean?"

It has come to my attention that several Democratic presidential candidates are endorsing the idea of reparations for the descendants of slaves these include: Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Marianne Williamson. In a telephone discussion with a former school mate of mine concerning the subject, she approved of the idea of reparations as a means of closing the economic gap that many black Americans have far too long have staggered behind in time. All the false promises like 40 acres and a mule (which was never paid), Jim Crow, discriminatory housing practices etcetera have all played in affect, the stagnation of economic equality between black and white Americans. She further argued that abolishment of slavery did not reset opportunity for social and economical equality, and the systems that existed after slavery perpetuated racism which prevented equitable opportunity for people of color. In addition she stated to me that black Americans were impacted by federal housing laws and even today these laws in part are still in effect.

To put this in context for you guys my mother during her time could not live in any neighborhood and most certainly she had to live in areas where it was populated by predominately blacks. the value of home ownership in comparison to white home ownership is less even when crime was very low. The very fact that people were of a different skin pigmentation sets a particular value for the housing market and it still continues still this day. I then asked her how she felt regarding the pushback in social commentary Ben Shiparo came to mind. She said:

"When white Americans talk about why should I pay for something I was not involved in? I tell them why do we as taxpayers fund wars we do not completely believe in? Or what about African-Americans Latinos, Native Americans paying for reparations for the Japanese in the 1980's?"

Sounds compelling she further added:

"I take issue for those arguing against reparations focusing on the history of slavery and not take into consideration the subsequent discriminatory experiences faced by black Americans. 243 years of slavery, 10 to 12 years of reconstruction, 19 years of Jim Crow all the way until 1970 as the marker, blacks were technically free for 49 years. To add to this the Fair Housing Act was passed because it was filibustered for three years and MLK had to be assassinated for the House to pass it. When whites ask how they would feel about reparations to blacks, I tell them to ask the descendants of Rosewood and Black Wall street and how racism destroyed affluent black communities. There were blacks who owned hundreds of acres of land and had to abandon them due to the KKK threatening them with lynching even though police were present during those times (police are considered as government entities) smart Democrats see this."

Ultimately what I see that is problematic when it comes to Democrats pandering the idea of reparations is that psychologically we do not live in a society that is ready to recognize its sins and ready to close the gap because I firmly believe there are people that fear competition. I believe given the opportunity and if all things were reset equally with equal opportunities without discriminatory practices black Americans would be very successful. Unfortunately in my lifetime this society is not ready to acknowledge generations of discrimination which affected generations of people over time. Gentrification, redlining, all played a part in dismantling black economic growth that no Democrat will be able to fix, at least not in my lifetime.

Sooo...how much do we owe you?

 

[pearl]

Ultimately what I see that is problematic when it comes to Democrats pandering the idea of reparations is that psychologically we do not live in a society that is ready to recognize its sins and ready to close the gap because I firmly believe there are people that fear competition. I believe given the opportunity and if all things were reset equally with equal opportunities without discriminatory practices black Americans would be very successful.

There are many, many highly educated and successful black Americans in all walks of life, some attributed to 'Affirmative Action' others to perseverance.
Little attention is paid to this. What we ought to be alarmed about now is the real possibility of loosing what has been gained.

 

[Mindmaster]

Upon reading some stuff at work (of course while on break) I was reading about the discussions regarding Democratic candidates opening up the discussion of reparations for black Americans. Interesting enough the discussion of course on different political platforms evolved into inflammatory discussions.

I hate this conversation for several reasons, first it's sort of the sins of the father thing. It's punishing modern people for what their ancestors did, but here are the silly bits... If we're entertaining that line of thought.

1) The Democrats were largely the slave owners. Who really is to blame?

2) Black slaves were captured and sold by blacks, mostly. Who again, is really to blame? There wasn't a group of white people that invaded Africa and started rounding them up, no tribal leaders in Africa were doing this job in trade for goods and cash. To some extent, black people themselves are entirely responsible for the majority of their enslavement.

3) It's extremely racist if you think about it. The answer to racism isn't racism, or special consideration for one race over another. At best, it just reinforces that divides, and worst it fuels hatred from the people whom have to pay the tax.

By history, if we want to decide who is paying it's Democrats and the families of former slave owners. I mean, we are interested in keeping it fair, right? Obviously, the idea is completely absurd -- first of all owning slaves didn't mean you mistreated them. Despite the popular tropes slaves were valuable to most people that had them -- harming them was like destroying your own home or vehicle; if they couldn't work their value was exactly zero. So, most slave owners did treat them at least a bit better than they could have existed in the poor and underdeveloped world they came from. They were at least treated as well as a family pet or livestock -- well fed, medical needs looked after, and so on. Yeah, it wasn't a great situation in comparison to now, but they certainly had a better life here than where they came from. (Africa was largely plagued by tribal wars at the time, with lots of human costs. Often your life span in Africa was pretty violent and short. Things weren't the greatest here for the slave, but certainly not as bad.)

Lastly, I have no idea how you determine who pays for this other than to just be racist against white people over the matter. We don't know who these old Democrats are, and we don't know what black people were responsible for selling their brethren into slavery. From this angle, I'd completely reject the notion as absurd. We don't solve racism by becoming racist against white people any more than a similar sanction placed on blacks would be legitimate if the tables were turned. By this logic, charging black people reparations because they commit more crimes on white people would be legitimate, and so on... This is a foolish game.

 

[Shad]

Against the idea especially coming from Dems that created the mess in the first place. Let Warren and ilk like her pay for it out their own wallet.

 

[BSM1]

I hate this conversation for several reasons, first it's sort of the sins of the father thing. It's punishing modern people for what their ancestors did, but here are the silly bits... If we're entertaining that line of thought.

1) The Democrats were largely the slave owners. Who really is to blame?

2) Black slaves were captured and sold by blacks, mostly. Who again, is really to blame? There wasn't a group of white people that invaded Africa and started rounding them up, no tribal leaders in Africa were doing this job in trade for goods and cash. To some extent, black people themselves are entirely responsible for the majority of their enslavement.

3) It's extremely racist if you think about it. The answer to racism isn't racism, or special consideration for one race over another. At best, it just reinforces that divides, and worst it fuels hatred from the people whom have to pay the tax.

By history, if we want to decide who is paying it's Democrats and the families of former slave owners. I mean, we are interested in keeping it fair, right? Obviously, the idea is completely absurd -- first of all owning slaves didn't mean you mistreated them. Despite the popular tropes slaves were valuable to most people that had them -- harming them was like destroying your own home or vehicle; if they couldn't work their value was exactly zero. So, most slave owners did treat them at least a bit better than they could have existed in the poor and underdeveloped world they came from. They were at least treated as well as a family pet or livestock -- well fed, medical needs looked after, and so on. Yeah, it wasn't a great situation in comparison to now, but they certainly had a better life here than where they came from. (Africa was largely plagued by tribal wars at the time, with lots of human costs. Often your life span in Africa was pretty violent and short. Things weren't the greatest here for the slave, but certainly not as bad.)

Lastly, I have no idea how you determine who pays for this other than to just be racist against white people over the matter. We don't know who these old Democrats are, and we don't know what black people were responsible for selling their brethren into slavery. From this angle, I'd completely reject the notion as absurd. We don't solve racism by becoming racist against white people any more than a similar sanction placed on blacks would be legitimate if the tables were turned. By this logic, charging black people reparations because they commit more crimes on white people would be legitimate, and so on... This is a foolish game.

Although I believe that the institution of slavery is despicable and should be eradicated from the face of the earth, I also feel that every "African-American" here today should drop to their knees and thank God that their ancestors were one step slower than the black slavers.

 

[BSM1]

Against the idea especially coming from Dems that created the mess in the first place. Let Warren and ilk like her pay for it out their own wallet.

She'll want to pay them in beads and hides (I am truly sorry for this, but I just couldn't help it).

 

[Shad]

She'll want to pay them in beads and hides (I am truly sorry for this, but I just couldn't help it).

Warren 1/2020!

 

[Mindmaster]

Although I believe that the institution of slavery is despicable and should be eradicated from the face of the earth, I also feel that every "African-American" here today should drop to their knees and thank God that their ancestors were one step slower than the black slavers.

I'm totally against slavery, but realize it's different times and that also for most who became slaves at the time it was an upgrade. Plenty of white folks came to America via a process called indentured servitude as well, where they would agree to work a number of years as a servant in exchange for boat fare, food, and lodging in the new country. Those servants basically lived by the same rules as the black slaves coming in later from Africa. Slavery was just how things were done at the time, admittedly less than ideal but not all gloom and doom either.

 

[Shad]

I'm totally against slavery, but realize it's different times and that also for most who became slaves at the time it was an upgrade. Plenty of white folks came to America via a process called indentured servitude as well, where they would agree to work a number of years as a servant in exchange for boat fare, food, and lodging in the new country.

That is a sticking point in a lot of ethnic clashes in the past. The Irish for example.

Those servants basically lived by the same rules as the black slaves coming in later from Africa. Slavery was just how things were done at the time, admittedly less than ideal but not all gloom and doom either.

Not even close to some of the conditions faced on plantations and what people could do to slaves. White indentured servants had far greater community resources such as Catholics and the RCC, and protecting of laws which were not applicable to blacks. Slaves in the America South could be killed on a whim by their master or a representative of for example.

 

[Woberts]

>Guys slavery wasn't that bad because the blacks did it first

 

[Mindmaster]

Not even close to some of the conditions faced on plantations and what people could do to slaves. White indentured servants had far greater community resources such as Catholics and the RCC, and protecting of laws which were not applicable to blacks. Slaves in the America South could be killed on a whim by their master or a representative of for example.

It's not exactly the same, but comparable. If you're comparing two types of slavery which one is really better than the other, lol.

But, again, just because something is possible doesn't mean it's useful or economically viable. Harming your slaves would cost you money, in the end, either in medical bills or losing revenue. Plantations were owned by businessmen, not the average Joe -- at the end of the day, sure you are going to see some instances of terrible treatment, but you see that even now when someone calls themselves an "employee". Only the mentally challenged would take a one off example of mistreatment and then attempt to display it as a norm. This was obviously not the case, because the largest driver of slavery was profits. You aren't making any money on wounded slaves who can't do the work, and it's doubly stupid to think that most people would willingly damage what they would consider to be their property. It'd be similar to running a landscaping business and taking a hammer to one of your lawnmowers because it won't start that day. It just doesn't make sense to me at all.

Indentured servants had it very ****ty as well, and while they had the same color of skin as their masters didn't have it vastly better than the black slave, initially. Murdering slaves was frowned upon, and later on completely illegal. From about 1732 on you'd go to jail if you killed one, even if it was your own.

 

[Twilight Hue]

What's even more crazy was there were black slave masters in the south as well as black regiments fighting for the Confederacy.

Hell there were even white slaves to boot!!!

White Cargo

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm totally against slavery, but realize it's different times and that also for most who became slaves at the time it was an upgrade. Plenty of white folks came to America via a process called indentured servitude as well, where they would agree to work a number of years as a servant in exchange for boat fare, food, and lodging in the new country. Those servants basically lived by the same rules as the black slaves coming in later from Africa. Slavery was just how things were done at the time, admittedly less than ideal but not all gloom and doom either.

The difference is a great one....
Indentured servants voluntarily entered into an agreement of limited duration.
Slaves had no choice in the matter. Ownership was typically for life.

Question...
Some former slaves later owned slaves themselves.
Should the owners' descendents be excluded from reparations?

 

[sooda]

Most of the atrocities done to the blacks were done by the Democrats. The Civil War was between the Democrats and the Republicans, with President Lincoln a Republican. The Republicans have been helping the blacks, against the Democrats, since the time of Lincoln, for over 160 years.

In 1860 very few people owned slaves. Slaves were not cheap to buy or the own. Below is USA census from 1860. About 8% of the white population owned slaves, with the nearly 100% of this in the South. This was connected to agriculture. The South was Democrat.
1860 Census Results

If you look at 21st century statistics, the worse places to live, today, for the blacks, in terms of violence, drugs, poverty, poor education and lack of jobs is in cities controlled by the Democrats; Chicago, New York, Newark, Baltimore, Atlanta, etc., This has not changed in 160 years.

Some Democrats started to help the blacks, say 60 years ago, after 100 years of persecution, after the Emancipation Proclamation. This 100 year span is when the Democrats committed their worse atrocities such as from the KKK. If you do the math, the Democrats have the largest tab when it comes to reparations. However, they are trying to hide their shady past and pretend the Republicans are in the same boat and owe the same, simply for being white.

The patented Democrat freebie giveaway scam is played every electron cycle. If you add all the promised giveaways by the latest crop of Democrat candidates is adds to over $20 trillion. They try to buy votes, with promises they never keep. Their base falls for it every time.

Reparations are being promoted, by Democrat candidness, in a way that does not do justice to the real bullies of the blacks; Democrats from 1830-1950. The contemporary Democrat leadership knows this is being unfair. They also know this means the Republicans will resist the deal being offered in attempt to make this fair. The Democrats will then spin this resistance, so they can blame the Republicans for no Reparations. The goal is to trick the blacks to vote for their captures; Democrat Party based Stockholm syndrome. This way they can recycle reparations, again and again, each election cycle, while never having to doing anything. If it was serious, the Democrats would have to admit their shady past and man up for their 100 years of terror. They owe 90%, minimum.

The analogy for the reparation scam is I tell the kids in the neighborhood, that they deserve a fun summer. The kids agree with me. I then offer the kids the opportunity to swim in a nice swimming pool all summer. This pool is not mine, to offer. It belongs to Mr Jones. I have worded the scam to get credit for something that cannot happen, and I then use Mr Jones as the scapegoat, for this not happening. I will not tell the kids this was scam, so they will still continue to give me credit and hate Mr Jones.

So do YOU want reparations or not?