Slavery reparations?

[DriftingSand]

Thanks Sunni for the idea (sorta) re: 40 acres and a mule.

For.

We kidnapped them, enslaved them, should pay backwages. Fair's fair.

I'd say that the vast majority of "them" have long passed away; therefore, there really isn't anyone to pay "back-wages" to. I'd say that a statute of limitations also comes into play at this point.

My earliest ancestor to have step foot on American soil arrived as a white slave. If we DO decide to pay back-wages then I shall put my name in the hat and since he arrived in the mid 1600s I get first dibs on all of that cashola. I could certainly use a new pick up.

 

[Asclepias]

Your obvious lies and defensiveness cannot assist you, AssClapius.

As between you and me, i am the only one who HAS debated the question.

You, being the slovenly un-thinking hack ***** you are, pretend that making your assertions is the same as "debating."

It isn't.

You are just an assclown.

Yet you still have not debated the points offered. * * * *

You really ought to stop being such a massive and obvious liar, AssClap.

I am the one who HAS debated, and you are the one who refused to even begin the process. And yes. Everyone CAN see that.

Again: You endlessly state and re-state your desired conclusion. But you have not yet begun to support it.

If you had even the first ounce of integrity and honesty (you don't), you'd admit that so far you have sucked badly. So, out of an abundance of fairness, I will invite you to finally (at long long last) TRY to "make your case."

Is there some universal "principle" that supports your contention that the 4th and 5th and later generation progeny of former (long dead) slaves are "owed" anything by anybody now alive?

Is there some universal "principle" that would make the 4th and 5th and later generation progeny of even former (long dead) slave holders responsible for the sins of those ancient forebears?

Is there any logical, rational or fair "principle" at all that would call upon the 4th or 5th or later generation progeny of NON slave owners to provide "recompense" to the descendents of former (long dead) slaves?

What are those "principles?" How are they "fair?" Or do you propose that fairness can be dispensed with?

Come on, AssClap. It's way overdue. Step up to the plate. Say something that even begins to approximate a logical "argument."

If you had debated my questions you wouldnt be asking your totally irrelevant ones. For instance you wouldnt be talking about the progeny of dead slave holders. Your evasion of the questions put to you is obvious and a weak attempt to circumvent the issue. Its OK. I know you have nothing with which to counter act the points and therefore you will continue to avoid the points I brought up. Get someone in here that can take your place as you are too wussified to handle this.

 

[DriftingSand]

Speaking as a part Wendat Indian, our nation have claims that precede those of our African-American brothers. For instance, there is the matter of what could logically be considered genocide whether it be due to omission or commission in which somewhere between 9 and 20 million native American people died after contact with the Europeans. Followed by such things as the broken treaties and the trail of tears, residential schools, and on and on.

Now, on my other side, the Irish side, its high time we got our reparations from the British. We were forcibly evicted from our own land, or turned into tenants and left to starve when crops failed. An Irish population of 8 million in 1841 shrunk to 4.5 million in 1900.

As I see it, more or less everyone is owed some reparations for past wrongs.

I agree with your final statement. Many innocent Europeans died at the hands of native American Indians and many innocent American Indians died at the hands of early European settlers.

If we really want to get technical then the people of Rome owe Christians lots of money for burning Christians at the stake or tossing them to the lions.

Also, folks of Babylonian or Assyrian heritage owe the Israelites money for taking them captive in the centuries before Christ.

At some point we need to let the past remain the past and focus our attention on the future. That's not to say that we shouldn't learn from the past but it's not socially healthy to wallow in it.

 

[Asclepias]

Thanks Sunni for the idea (sorta) re: 40 acres and a mule.

For.

We kidnapped them, enslaved them, should pay backwages. Fair's fair.

I'd say that the vast majority of "them" have long passed away; therefore, there really isn't anyone to pay "back-wages" to. I'd say that a statute of limitations also comes into play at this point.

My earliest ancestor to have step foot on American soil arrived as a white slave. If we DO decide to pay back-wages then I shall put my name in the hat and since he arrived in the mid 1600s I get first dibs on all of that cashola. I could certainly use a new pick up.

There is no statute of limitations on reparations. If you have a link i would be most interested in seeing it. The difference in white slavery and Black slavery is that whites were not enslaved for multiple generations and did turn the US into the economic power that cotton afforded it. Howerver, we are speaking specifically about Black slavery and so far no one wants to concentrate on that. Instead I see a lot of people talking about other things instead of the point.

 

[DriftingSand]

Your obvious lies and defensiveness cannot assist you, AssClapius.

As between you and me, i am the only one who HAS debated the question.

You, being the slovenly un-thinking hack ***** you are, pretend that making your assertions is the same as "debating."

It isn't.

You are just an assclown.

Yet you still have not debated the points offered. * * * *

You really ought to stop being such a massive and obvious liar, AssClap.

I am the one who HAS debated, and you are the one who refused to even begin the process. And yes. Everyone CAN see that.

Again: You endlessly state and re-state your desired conclusion. But you have not yet begun to support it.

If you had even the first ounce of integrity and honesty (you don't), you'd admit that so far you have sucked badly. So, out of an abundance of fairness, I will invite you to finally (at long long last) TRY to "make your case."

Is there some universal "principle" that supports your contention that the 4th and 5th and later generation progeny of former (long dead) slaves are "owed" anything by anybody now alive?

Is there some universal "principle" that would make the 4th and 5th and later generation progeny of even former (long dead) slave holders responsible for the sins of those ancient forebears?

Is there any logical, rational or fair "principle" at all that would call upon the 4th or 5th or later generation progeny of NON slave owners to provide "recompense" to the descendents of former (long dead) slaves?

What are those "principles?" How are they "fair?" Or do you propose that fairness can be dispensed with?

Come on, AssClap. It's way overdue. Step up to the plate. Say something that even begins to approximate a logical "argument."

Good points, all!

It's like claiming that modern Jews owe Orthodox Russians money for the atrocities committed by the Jewish Bolsheviks during the Russian revolution that took place in the early years of the last century. First of all, not all Jews were Bolsheviks back then (though the vast majority of the Bolsheviks were Jews) and, secondly, them who are related to the Bolsheviks of that era aren't responsible for the crimes committed by them. Therefore, it wouldn't be fair to require modern Jews to pay for the crimes committed by an earlier generation.

 

[DriftingSand]

Thanks Sunni for the idea (sorta) re: 40 acres and a mule.

For.

We kidnapped them, enslaved them, should pay backwages. Fair's fair.

I'd say that the vast majority of "them" have long passed away; therefore, there really isn't anyone to pay "back-wages" to. I'd say that a statute of limitations also comes into play at this point.

My earliest ancestor to have step foot on American soil arrived as a white slave. If we DO decide to pay back-wages then I shall put my name in the hat and since he arrived in the mid 1600s I get first dibs on all of that cashola. I could certainly use a new pick up.

There is no statute of limitations on reparations. If you have a link i would be most interested in seeing it. The difference in white slavery and Black slavery is that whites were not enslaved for multiple generations and did turn the US into the economic power that cotton afforded it. Howerver, we are speaking specifically about Black slavery and so far no one wants to concentrate on that. Instead I see a lot of people talking about other things instead of the point.

You are aware that there were free blacks who owned black slaves back then ... aren't you? Slavery is a bad thing but I'm not guilty of owning any slaves nor are any of my ancestors (that I know of). If I commit a crime I should pay for it. If I do NOT commit a crime I should not pay for it. Simple math!

And who says that there is "no statute of limitations on reparations?" Them who demand reparations or you?

 

[Asclepias]

I'd say that the vast majority of "them" have long passed away; therefore, there really isn't anyone to pay "back-wages" to. I'd say that a statute of limitations also comes into play at this point.

My earliest ancestor to have step foot on American soil arrived as a white slave. If we DO decide to pay back-wages then I shall put my name in the hat and since he arrived in the mid 1600s I get first dibs on all of that cashola. I could certainly use a new pick up.

There is no statute of limitations on reparations. If you have a link i would be most interested in seeing it. The difference in white slavery and Black slavery is that whites were not enslaved for multiple generations and did turn the US into the economic power that cotton afforded it. Howerver, we are speaking specifically about Black slavery and so far no one wants to concentrate on that. Instead I see a lot of people talking about other things instead of the point.

You are aware that there were free blacks who owned black slaves back then ... aren't you? Slavery is a bad thing but I'm not guilty of owning any slaves nor are any of my ancestors (that I know of). If I commit a crime I should pay for it. If I do NOT commit a crime I should not pay for it. Simple math!

I see you missed the points I outlined as well. Since you are new I will repeat them. This is not a hunt down the descendents of slave owners like the guys would have you believe. This is the US paying the tab for Black Africans being enslaved and making the US an economic world power without compensation.


Slavery was wrong.
The US allowed slavery (to address your point)
Reparations are used to right a wrong.
Ex-slaves were never paid reparations.
There has never been a system in the US that benefited only the descendants of slaves.
Japanese were paid reparations via tax money by the US government setting a precedent.
Presidents have announced slavery was wrong fulfilling the criteria of the first point.
There is no expiration period for reparations.
There is nothing that says reparations has to be paid to someone living.

See if you can intelligently argue these points since so many have failed to address them.

 

[BobPlumb]

Afirmative Action.......the debt should be considered paid in full by now.

 

[Asclepias]

Afirmative Action.......the debt should be considered paid in full by now.

Strike one.

White women are the biggest benefactors of AA. It is not a Black only program. Its not even close.

 

[BobPlumb]

Afirmative Action.......the debt should be considered paid in full by now.

Strike one.

White women are the biggest benefactors of AA. It is not a Black only program. Its not even close.

Sorry, no one made you the umpire!

 

[Asclepias]

Afirmative Action.......the debt should be considered paid in full by now.

Strike one.

White women are the biggest benefactors of AA. It is not a Black only program. Its not even close.

Sorry, no one made you the umpire!

No one made you the umpire either. I was just killing your lame argument.

 

[BobPlumb]

Strike one.

White women are the biggest benefactors of AA. It is not a Black only program. Its not even close.

Sorry, no one made you the umpire!

No one made you the umpire either. I was just killing your lame argument.

Your a joke. Later dude.

 

[Asclepias]

Sorry, no one made you the umpire!

No one made you the umpire either. I was just killing your lame argument.

Your a joke. Later dude.

Thats what i would say too if I my rebuttal was totally ignorant of the facts.

 

[Chaussette]

So ascwipe, how much money are you looking for from Whitney this time?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is no statute of limitations on reparations. If you have a link i would be most interested in seeing it. The difference in white slavery and Black slavery is that whites were not enslaved for multiple generations and did turn the US into the economic power that cotton afforded it. Howerver, we are speaking specifically about Black slavery and so far no one wants to concentrate on that. Instead I see a lot of people talking about other things instead of the point.

You are aware that there were free blacks who owned black slaves back then ... aren't you? Slavery is a bad thing but I'm not guilty of owning any slaves nor are any of my ancestors (that I know of). If I commit a crime I should pay for it. If I do NOT commit a crime I should not pay for it. Simple math!

I see you missed the points I outlined as well. Since you are new I will repeat them. This is not a hunt down the descendents of slave owners like the guys would have you believe. This is the US paying the tab for Black Africans being enslaved and making the US an economic world power without compensation.


Slavery was wrong.
The US allowed slavery (to address your point)
Reparations are used to right a wrong.
Ex-slaves were never paid reparations.
There has never been a system in the US that benefited only the descendants of slaves.
Japanese were paid reparations via tax money by the US government setting a precedent.
Presidents have announced slavery was wrong fulfilling the criteria of the first point.
There is no expiration period for reparations.
There is nothing that says reparations has to be paid to someone living.

See if you can intelligently argue these points since so many have failed to address them.

Ex-slaves were never paid reparations.

How much should they have been paid?
Based on what metric?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Yet you still have not debated the points offered. * * * *

You really ought to stop being such a massive and obvious liar, AssClap.

I am the one who HAS debated, and you are the one who refused to even begin the process. And yes. Everyone CAN see that.

Again: You endlessly state and re-state your desired conclusion. But you have not yet begun to support it.

If you had even the first ounce of integrity and honesty (you don't), you'd admit that so far you have sucked badly. So, out of an abundance of fairness, I will invite you to finally (at long long last) TRY to "make your case."

Is there some universal "principle" that supports your contention that the 4th and 5th and later generation progeny of former (long dead) slaves are "owed" anything by anybody now alive?

Is there some universal "principle" that would make the 4th and 5th and later generation progeny of even former (long dead) slave holders responsible for the sins of those ancient forebears?

Is there any logical, rational or fair "principle" at all that would call upon the 4th or 5th or later generation progeny of NON slave owners to provide "recompense" to the descendents of former (long dead) slaves?

What are those "principles?" How are they "fair?" Or do you propose that fairness can be dispensed with?

Come on, AssClap. It's way overdue. Step up to the plate. Say something that even begins to approximate a logical "argument."

If you had debated my questions you wouldnt be asking your totally irrelevant ones. For instance you wouldnt be talking about the progeny of dead slave holders. Your evasion of the questions put to you is obvious and a weak attempt to circumvent the issue. Its OK. I know you have nothing with which to counter act the points and therefore you will continue to avoid the points I brought up. Get someone in here that can take your place as you are too wussified to handle this.

^ your evasion is again noted.

With hilarity.

You may be plodding, predictable, trite and boring, but at least you bring nothing to the table, Assclap.

What IS the basis for "REPARATIONS" if it is not asking for something to be REPAID for slavery, you insufferable assclown lying hack *****?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

There is no statute of limitations on reparations. If you have a link i would be most interested in seeing it. The difference in white slavery and Black slavery is that whites were not enslaved for multiple generations and did turn the US into the economic power that cotton afforded it. Howerver, we are speaking specifically about Black slavery and so far no one wants to concentrate on that. Instead I see a lot of people talking about other things instead of the point.

You are aware that there were free blacks who owned black slaves back then ... aren't you? Slavery is a bad thing but I'm not guilty of owning any slaves nor are any of my ancestors (that I know of). If I commit a crime I should pay for it. If I do NOT commit a crime I should not pay for it. Simple math!

I see you missed the points I outlined as well. Since you are new I will repeat them. This is not a hunt down the descendents of slave owners like the guys would have you believe. This is the US paying the tab for Black Africans being enslaved and making the US an economic world power without compensation.

Paying the "tab" TO WHOM, you poor pathetic hack ***** idiot?

Slavery was wrong.

Yes. It was.

The US allowed slavery (to address your point)

That was then. This is now. If you have a point, you aren't making it citing nonsense factoids, AssClap.

Reparations are used to right a wrong.

No. They wouldn't be used to right ANY wrong since the ones wronged would not be the beneficiary of any such "payments." Neither would their children. Neither would their great grandchildren.

Ex-slaves were never paid reparations.

True. Sad. Irrelevant. But both true and sad.

There has never been a system in the US that benefited only the descendants of slaves.

There has never been a human being on Mars, either. Another true fact that has no bearing whatsoever on YOUR contention that somebody owes somebody "reparations."

Japanese were paid reparations via tax money by the US government setting a precedent.

Those were the victims or the direct descendants of the victims of FDR's actions. It sets no "precedent" of ANY logical kind for "slavery reparations" under the circumstances of that irrational claim for reparations.

Presidents have announced slavery was wrong fulfilling the criteria of the first point.

It fulfills nothing. Acknowledging that an ancient wrong was wong is just stating a simple (obvious) and undisputed fact.

There is no expiration period for reparations.

Of course there is.

There is nothing that says reparations has to be paid to someone living.

I suppose you COULD pay the dead, but it wont do them any good, since they are all -- you know -- dead. Good Lord, you are completely off the rails in your irrationality and imbecility, AssClap.

See if you can intelligently argue these points since so many have failed to address them.

You have not made an argument, yet. Try to do that first. Then maybe your "logic," if you ever offer any, can be addressed, AssClap.

 

[Steven_R]

Slavery was wrong.

Agreed.

The US allowed slavery (to address your point)

Until 1865.

Reparations are used to right a wrong.

Sometimes, but not always.

Ex-slaves were never paid reparations.

So what? Lots of people get fucked over and don't get anything for their troubles. Even if slavery was wrong, why should someone get reparations for something that was legal to do in the first place?

There has never been a system in the US that benefited only the descendants of slaves.

So what? There also aren't any systems in place that benefit the decedents of the Irish or Indentured Servants or drunks killed by the feds ordering denatured alcohol be sold during Prohibition knowing it would kill people.

Japanese were paid reparations via tax money by the US government setting a precedent.

The difference is the reparations were paid to the people who were actually harmed, not to people a century later.

Presidents have announced slavery was wrong fulfilling the criteria of the first point.

Presidents say a lot of stuff that means nothing legally.

There is no expiration period for reparations.

Why should I pay for the sins of anyone long dead?

There is nothing that says reparations has to be paid to someone living.

Well, considering it was the dead guys who were hurt, why should anyone but them get anything?

Church it up all you like, you want free shit because someone you never met suffered.

 

[Asclepias]

So ascwipe, how much money are you looking for from Whitney this time?

I dont know anyone named Whitney nor have I ever asked her to pay something she owed my ancestors.

 

[Asclepias]

You really ought to stop being such a massive and obvious liar, AssClap.

I am the one who HAS debated, and you are the one who refused to even begin the process. And yes. Everyone CAN see that.

Again: You endlessly state and re-state your desired conclusion. But you have not yet begun to support it.

If you had even the first ounce of integrity and honesty (you don't), you'd admit that so far you have sucked badly. So, out of an abundance of fairness, I will invite you to finally (at long long last) TRY to "make your case."

Is there some universal "principle" that supports your contention that the 4th and 5th and later generation progeny of former (long dead) slaves are "owed" anything by anybody now alive?

Is there some universal "principle" that would make the 4th and 5th and later generation progeny of even former (long dead) slave holders responsible for the sins of those ancient forebears?

Is there any logical, rational or fair "principle" at all that would call upon the 4th or 5th or later generation progeny of NON slave owners to provide "recompense" to the descendents of former (long dead) slaves?

What are those "principles?" How are they "fair?" Or do you propose that fairness can be dispensed with?

Come on, AssClap. It's way overdue. Step up to the plate. Say something that even begins to approximate a logical "argument."

If you had debated my questions you wouldnt be asking your totally irrelevant ones. For instance you wouldnt be talking about the progeny of dead slave holders. Your evasion of the questions put to you is obvious and a weak attempt to circumvent the issue. Its OK. I know you have nothing with which to counter act the points and therefore you will continue to avoid the points I brought up. Get someone in here that can take your place as you are too wussified to handle this.

^ your evasion is again noted.

With hilarity.

You may be plodding, predictable, trite and boring, but at least you bring nothing to the table, Assclap.

What IS the basis for "REPARATIONS" if it is not asking for something to be REPAID for slavery, you insufferable assclown lying hack *****?

This must really be stressing you out. You feel this topic in your soul dont you?