Zone1 How we repair it: White Americans’ attitudes toward reparations

Oh, we don't care what excuse some urban thug uses for his pathology. If he does that, he's going to prison. For the rest of his life. We might even start bringing back the death penalty.

You see, a lot of white people were pretty sympathetic after Career Criminal George Floyd was murdered. I saw white kids in my suburb wearing BLM tee shirts in 2020.

They aren't wearing them now, are they? The Reform Prosecutors are being thrown out on their asses.

No one is giving you reparations. Deal with it. Start working on solving your own problems. You can start by looking at what Asian people are doing right and emulating that.
Can't disagree with this!

Also the problem, there is no guarantee, that the Black community will stop using "Systemic Racism" as a crutch. The fear that they will continue to move the goal posts time and time again is absolutely plausible.
 
It seems to me that "reparations" is nothing more than feel-good talk that Democrats dangle in front of the descendants of Black African slaves in order to get their votes, in the vain expectation that some sort of massive payments will be forthcoming.

It says nothing good about either the Democrats or the Black folks to cling to these silly lies.
Democrats who dangle the possibility of reparations before Negroes are foolish. Talk of reparations arouses hostility toward Negroes and Democrats.
 
Can't disagree with this!

Also the problem, there is no guarantee, that the Black community will stop using "Systemic Racism" as a crutch. The fear that they will continue to move the goal posts time and time again is absolutely plausible.
Systemic Racism is the current excuse for black failure when there is no evidence of discrimination.

The average black IQ is 85. The average white IQ is 100. That is all you need to know about the high rate of black poverty.
 
Democrats who dangle the possibility of reparations before Negroes are foolish. Talk of reparations arouses hostility toward Negroes and Democrats.

Except no one is seriously talking about it... it's a non-starter.

Not that you won't get upset at the mere notion, though.

I don't think cash reparations are the answer, but I do think that there SHOULD be formal apologies for Jim Crow and Slavery.
 
Systemic Racism is the current excuse for black failure when there is no evidence of discrimination.

The average black IQ is 85. The average white IQ is 100. That is all you need to know about the high rate of black poverty.
Except there's plenty of evidence for discrimination.

Hey, check this out.


Because names are among the first things you learn about someone, they can influence first impressions.


That this is particularly true for names associated with Black people came to light in 2004 with the release of a study that found employers seeing identical resumes were 50% more likely to call back an applicant with stereotypical white names like Emily or Greg versus applicants with names like Jamal or Lakisha.

I’m a behavioral economist who researches discrimination in labor markets. In a study based on a hiring experiment I conducted with another economist, Rulof Burger, we found that participants systematically discriminated against job candidates with names they associated with Black people, especially when put under time pressure. We also found that white people who oppose affirmative action discriminated more than other people against job candidates with distinctly Black names, whether or not they had to make rushed decisions.
 
It seems that the concept of reparations is a problem. Apparently that is based on a lack of knowledge about history. Most just reflexively while not really knowing the iinformation that makes the case for reparations. So it appears that an education as to why reparations should be paid needs to happen and included is the information that can and will be used as part of the case.

The opposition to reparations being paid for something that happened 200 years ago is invalid, you will see why in a few seconds.

How we repair it: White Americans’ attitudes toward reparations​

The United States is again at a crossroads of racial reckoning. The death of George Floyd and the 2020 summer of protests for racial justice added new urgency to ongoing discussions about the legacy of slavery and its contemporary implications for the lives of Black Americans. A key question at the root of this discussion is: how do we repair the harm – economic, physical, and psychological — caused to Black lives by slavery, Jim Crow, redlining, police brutality, and other manifestations of systemic racism?
The United States has used reparations—targeted initiatives intended to concretely repair a harm against a person or persons resulting from the collective action of others—as a means of acknowledging and atoning for its role in other atrocities, including the internment of Japanese Americans and the forced removal and destruction of six indigenous communities: the Ottawas of Michigan, the Chippewas of Wisconsin, the Seminoles of Florida, the Sioux of South Dakota, the Klamaths of Oregon, and the Alaska Natives.* However, the descendants of Africans enslaved on U.S. soil have been notably absent from this history of reparative actions. While the task of reparations seems daunting to many Americans considering the scale of injustice presented by slavery and its aftermath, we believe this is a conversation the country needs to have.

Given that white Americans gained the most from slavery and its compounded effects — a process referred to as unjust enrichment – is their widespread opposition to reparations rooted in maintaining this advantage?


1970: Richard Nixon signed into law House Resolution 471 restoring Blue Lake and surrounding area to the Taos Pueblo (New Mexico). The land had been taken by presidential order in 1906. (A History of the Indians in the United States by Angie Debo (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1984, p. 422); see also "Taos Pueblo celebrates 40th anniversary of Blue Lake's return" by Matthew van Buren, Santa Fe New Mexican, September 18, 2010.)

The payments from 1971-1988 are taken from the booklet Black Reparations Now! 40 Acres, $50 Dollars, and a Mule, + Interest by Dorothy Benton-Lewis; and borrowed from N’COBRA (National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America).

1971: Around $1 billion + 44 million acres of land: Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.

1974: A $10 million out-of-court settlement was reached between the U.S. government and Tuskegee victims, black men who had been unwitting subjects of a study of untreated syphilis, and who did not receive available treatments. (“The Tuskegee Timeline”, CDC, updated March 2, 2020.)

1980: $81 million: Klamaths of Oregon. ("Spending Spree" by Dylan Darling, Herald and News (Klamath Falls, OR), June 21, 2005.)

1980: $105 million: Sioux of South Dakota for seizure of their land. (United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371 (1980).)

1985: $12.3 million: Seminoles of Florida. (see Racial Justice in America: A Reference Handbook by David B. Mustard, 2002, ABC-CLIO, p. 81.)

1985: $31 million: Chippewas of Wisconsin. (see Racial Justice in America: A Reference Handbook by David B. Mustard, 2002, ABC-CLIO, p. 81.)

1986: $32 million per 1836 Treaty: Ottawas of Michigan. (see Racial Justice in America: A Reference Handbook by David B. Mustard, 2002, ABC-CLIO, p. 81.)

2016: The U.S. government reached a settlement of $492 million with 17 Native American tribes to resolve lawsuits alleging the federal government mismanaged tribal land, resources, and money. (“U.S. Government To Pay $492 Million To 17 American Indian Tribes” by Rebecca Hersher, NPR, September 27, 2016.)

2018: The Supreme Court, in a 4-4 deadlock, let stand a lower court's order to the state of Washington to make billions of dollars worth of repairs to roads, where the state had built culverts below road channels and structures in a way that prevented salmon from swimming through and reaching their spawning grounds, that had damaged the state’s salmon habitats and contributed to population loss. The case involved the Stevens Treaties, a series of agreements in 1854-55, in which tribes in Washington State gave up millions of acres of land in exchange for "the right to take fish." Implicit in the treaties, courts would later rule, was a guarantee that there would be enough fish for the tribes to harvest. Destroying the habitat reduces the population and thus violates these treaties. This decision directly affects the Swinomish Tribe. ("A Victory For A Tribe That’s Lost Its Salmon" by John Eligon, The New York Times, June 12, 2018.)


Were any of you alive when those tribes were forcibly removed or cheated?
White Americans? If this looney tunes proposal ever come to pass which of course it won't, you're going to have a lot of pissed off Hispanics too.

Still, I pray the Dems put it on their platform.
 
Can't disagree with this!

Also the problem, there is no guarantee, that the Black community will stop using "Systemic Racism" as a crutch. The fear that they will continue to move the goal posts time and time again is absolutely plausible.
Whites have received at least 8 handouts and today are asking for more. Therefore you really need to stop with the double standard.
 
Then the OP should prove any reparation ended racism

~S~
No, because other groups got reparations and none if this was asked. So just stop demanding things from blacks you asked from no one else.
 
It seems that the concept of reparations is a problem. Apparently that is based on a lack of knowledge about history. Most just reflexively while not really knowing the iinformation that makes the case for reparations. So it appears that an education as to why reparations should be paid needs to happen and included is the information that can and will be used as part of the case.

The opposition to reparations being paid for something that happened 200 years ago is invalid, you will see why in a few seconds.

How we repair it: White Americans’ attitudes toward reparations​

The United States is again at a crossroads of racial reckoning. The death of George Floyd and the 2020 summer of protests for racial justice added new urgency to ongoing discussions about the legacy of slavery and its contemporary implications for the lives of Black Americans. A key question at the root of this discussion is: how do we repair the harm – economic, physical, and psychological — caused to Black lives by slavery, Jim Crow, redlining, police brutality, and other manifestations of systemic racism?
The United States has used reparations—targeted initiatives intended to concretely repair a harm against a person or persons resulting from the collective action of others—as a means of acknowledging and atoning for its role in other atrocities, including the internment of Japanese Americans and the forced removal and destruction of six indigenous communities: the Ottawas of Michigan, the Chippewas of Wisconsin, the Seminoles of Florida, the Sioux of South Dakota, the Klamaths of Oregon, and the Alaska Natives.* However, the descendants of Africans enslaved on U.S. soil have been notably absent from this history of reparative actions. While the task of reparations seems daunting to many Americans considering the scale of injustice presented by slavery and its aftermath, we believe this is a conversation the country needs to have.

Given that white Americans gained the most from slavery and its compounded effects — a process referred to as unjust enrichment – is their widespread opposition to reparations rooted in maintaining this advantage?


1970: Richard Nixon signed into law House Resolution 471 restoring Blue Lake and surrounding area to the Taos Pueblo (New Mexico). The land had been taken by presidential order in 1906. (A History of the Indians in the United States by Angie Debo (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1984, p. 422); see also "Taos Pueblo celebrates 40th anniversary of Blue Lake's return" by Matthew van Buren, Santa Fe New Mexican, September 18, 2010.)

The payments from 1971-1988 are taken from the booklet Black Reparations Now! 40 Acres, $50 Dollars, and a Mule, + Interest by Dorothy Benton-Lewis; and borrowed from N’COBRA (National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America).

1971: Around $1 billion + 44 million acres of land: Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.

1974: A $10 million out-of-court settlement was reached between the U.S. government and Tuskegee victims, black men who had been unwitting subjects of a study of untreated syphilis, and who did not receive available treatments. (“The Tuskegee Timeline”, CDC, updated March 2, 2020.)

1980: $81 million: Klamaths of Oregon. ("Spending Spree" by Dylan Darling, Herald and News (Klamath Falls, OR), June 21, 2005.)

1980: $105 million: Sioux of South Dakota for seizure of their land. (United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371 (1980).)

1985: $12.3 million: Seminoles of Florida. (see Racial Justice in America: A Reference Handbook by David B. Mustard, 2002, ABC-CLIO, p. 81.)

1985: $31 million: Chippewas of Wisconsin. (see Racial Justice in America: A Reference Handbook by David B. Mustard, 2002, ABC-CLIO, p. 81.)

1986: $32 million per 1836 Treaty: Ottawas of Michigan. (see Racial Justice in America: A Reference Handbook by David B. Mustard, 2002, ABC-CLIO, p. 81.)

2016: The U.S. government reached a settlement of $492 million with 17 Native American tribes to resolve lawsuits alleging the federal government mismanaged tribal land, resources, and money. (“U.S. Government To Pay $492 Million To 17 American Indian Tribes” by Rebecca Hersher, NPR, September 27, 2016.)

2018: The Supreme Court, in a 4-4 deadlock, let stand a lower court's order to the state of Washington to make billions of dollars worth of repairs to roads, where the state had built culverts below road channels and structures in a way that prevented salmon from swimming through and reaching their spawning grounds, that had damaged the state’s salmon habitats and contributed to population loss. The case involved the Stevens Treaties, a series of agreements in 1854-55, in which tribes in Washington State gave up millions of acres of land in exchange for "the right to take fish." Implicit in the treaties, courts would later rule, was a guarantee that there would be enough fish for the tribes to harvest. Destroying the habitat reduces the population and thus violates these treaties. This decision directly affects the Swinomish Tribe. ("A Victory For A Tribe That’s Lost Its Salmon" by John Eligon, The New York Times, June 12, 2018.)


Were any of you alive when those tribes were forcibly removed or cheated?
I have to hand it to Im2

He is the honey badger of free shoeshines for black people

The guy never lets up

But all his point of view does is prolong the failure of black people

Instead of forcing them to confront and change the bad habits that are keeping them down he insists on blaming white people for all that troubles blacks
 
You are missing the message. "We" did not fuck you over and that ship sailed.
People belive whatever it is they want to believe.
That is what you are doing. Then you sooth yourself, fool yourself really, by pretending to take an academic approach.

How about the 500,000 white people who gave their life to free you?il

I have never had one black person thank me for that ancestral loss.
You can stop that excuse. In the OP I believed that you were shown where the government has paid for things to other groups that happened during the same time period. You're talknig about about a ship sailing and then try telling me about 500,000 whites who died to free me. 500,000 whites didnot give their lives to free me, if the shio yu say sailed that one sailed too. 500,000 whites died to keep Americafrom splittingup. Because after the Civil War, white started Jim Crow in the north and south. You live on the benefiits created by racism and you have benefitted from the programs during Jim Crow that blacks were excluded from. Drop the sad sorry white excuses, they have no merit.
 
1970: Richard Nixon signed into law House Resolution 471 restoring Blue Lake and surrounding area to the Taos Pueblo (New Mexico). The land had been taken by presidential order in 1906. (A History of the Indians in the United States by Angie Debo (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1984, p. 422); see also "Taos Pueblo celebrates 40th anniversary of Blue Lake's return" by Matthew van Buren, Santa Fe New Mexican, September 18, 2010.)

The payments from 1971-1988 are taken from the booklet Black Reparations Now! 40 Acres, $50 Dollars, and a Mule, + Interest by Dorothy Benton-Lewis; and borrowed from N’COBRA (National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America).

1971: Around $1 billion + 44 million acres of land: Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.

1974: A $10 million out-of-court settlement was reached between the U.S. government and Tuskegee victims, black men who had been unwitting subjects of a study of untreated syphilis, and who did not receive available treatments. (“The Tuskegee Timeline”, CDC, updated March 2, 2020.)

1980: $81 million: Klamaths of Oregon. ("Spending Spree" by Dylan Darling, Herald and News (Klamath Falls, OR), June 21, 2005.)

1980: $105 million: Sioux of South Dakota for seizure of their land. (United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371 (1980).)

1985: $12.3 million: Seminoles of Florida. (see Racial Justice in America: A Reference Handbook by David B. Mustard, 2002, ABC-CLIO, p. 81.)

1985: $31 million: Chippewas of Wisconsin. (see Racial Justice in America: A Reference Handbook by David B. Mustard, 2002, ABC-CLIO, p. 81.)

1986: $32 million per 1836 Treaty: Ottawas of Michigan. (see Racial Justice in America: A Reference Handbook by David B. Mustard, 2002, ABC-CLIO, p. 81.)

2016: The U.S. government reached a settlement of $492 million with 17 Native American tribes to resolve lawsuits alleging the federal government mismanaged tribal land, resources, and money. (“U.S. Government To Pay $492 Million To 17 American Indian Tribes” by Rebecca Hersher, NPR, September 27, 2016.)

2018: The Supreme Court, in a 4-4 deadlock, let stand a lower court's order to the state of Washington to make billions of dollars worth of repairs to roads, where the state had built culverts below road channels and structures in a way that prevented salmon from swimming through and reaching their spawning grounds, that had damaged the state’s salmon habitats and contributed to population loss. The case involved the Stevens Treaties, a series of agreements in 1854-55, in which tribes in Washington State gave up millions of acres of land in exchange for "the right to take fish." Implicit in the treaties, courts would later rule, was a guarantee that there would be enough fish for the tribes to harvest. Destroying the habitat reduces the population and thus violates these treaties. This decision directly affects the Swinomish Tribe. ("A Victory For A Tribe That’s Lost Its Salmon" by John Eligon, The New York Times, June 12, 2018.)


Were any of you alive when those tribes were forcibly removed or cheated?
 
There will be more required because YOU don't have a say.. Unless you run for congress.
The politicians work for the voters, they won’t risk the votes of the 87% to pander to the 13%. Even the hard core liberals know that a vote for reparations would be the end of their career. The 87% DO have a voice and it’s opposed to reparations.
 
no, and neither were you, or anyone else reading this.....~S~
Well thats nice but then there is this:

Boston University Public Interest Law Journal
Volume 29, Issue 135
Winter 2019
BLACK REPARATIONS FOR TWENTIETH CENTURY FEDERAL
HOUSING DISCRIMINATION:
THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHITE WEALTH AND THE EFFECTS OF
DENIED BLACK HOMEOWNERSHIP

This paper examines the U.S. government’s instigation, participation,authorization, and perpetuation of federal housing discrimination against black Americans from the 1930s to the 1980s and the damage that such discrimination caused and continues to cause today. Delving into the U.S. government’s twentieth century federal housing practices, this paper discusses how the government effectively barred black-Americans from obtaining quality housing and from investing in housing as wealth, while simultaneously subsidizing and endorsing white homeownership, white suburbs, and white wealth.

Part I examines the U.S. government’s housing practices—from the New Deal until the 1968 Fair Housing Act and its 1988 Amendments—to reveal that although the New Deal’s national housing programs revolutionized homeownership and home equity in the United States, the U.S. government’s federal housing programs were racially discriminatory. Specifically, and quite shockingly, the U.S. government actively created and promulgated racist neighborhood rating systems that constructed

black neighborhoods and black property as unstable, volatile, hazardous, and not worthy of investment. Using these racist rating systems, the federal government endorsed racial covenants and invested federal money into the creation and accumulation of white wealth, the value of whiteness, white suburbia, and white homeownership. Meanwhile, the government denied blacks federal housing funding, fueling black stigma and barring black-Americans from the invaluable twentieth century opportunities of homeownership and home equity.

Understanding the U.S. government’s discriminatory housing practices, Part II discusses and quantifies the effects of the government’s housing discrimination on black-American households and communities. Finding that approximately 120 billion 1950s dollars--or more than 1.239 quintillion 2019 dollars—were invested to subsidize and create white-American wealth through homeownership...

Furthermore I posted a list in the OP of reparations gven to various groups for things that happened during the same time period as slavery so yur autoresponse no merit whatsoever.
 
Now we're off on affirmative action IM2?

That's a whole different kettle of fish vs. slavery

& you might want to check on the scotus's latest take

~S~
 

Forum List

Back
Top