Reparations & Protest

by Larry 64 Replies latest jw friends

  • LDH
    So, now we know slavery wasn't a crime until the closing months of the civil war,


    You sound a lot like the LOSER for the Society who says "We didn't know child sexual molestation was a crime until recently." What's her name? Dr Gail Bethea something.

    Ohkaaaayyyy then. Yeah, that's the ticket. No one ever heard it was WRONG to own another human being.

    In cases where damages are sought, as in this one, they can only be awarded from the property of heirs

    Perhaps you should read what I wrote more closely. I clearly stated:

    I DO NOT advocate reparations from taxpayers.

    On the other hand, I would LOVE to yank every god-damned dollar from fradulent organizations like the Carnegie Institute.

    If the people who never had anything to do with slavery, ie, you and I, should not be paying for it then others whose families DID exploit other humans should not be benefitting from it.

    You futher state:

    It seems clear to me that the claim of some Americans decendant from slaves, that they are entitled to "40 acres and Bentley" are unfounded, and without merit, as no law was broken, that was on the books at time their slavery was in effect.

    and yet I can think of SEVERAL multi-million dollar lawsuits off the top of my head that invoked MORAL outrage, but skirted the law.

    For instance: Is smoking a cigarette illegal? No, it never was. However, the tobacco companies purposely hid information which clearly showed that cigarette smoking kills. They were severly penalized IN A COURT OF LAW because of their morally reprehensible deceit.

    Was it illegal for factories in the early 20th century to exploit and kill their workers as described in Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle?" No, it wasn't. But it was morally reprehensible, and not until A REVOLUTION took place did the government begin to involve itself in workplace safety. Factories are still paying the price in terms of having to deal with unions.

    Was it illegal to treat Mexican farmworkers like shit? Not until someone named Cesar Chavez rallied the farmworkers to demand their rights. The same farmers who exploited Mexicans like dirty animals are now paying the price, as we passed laws demanding certain workplace rules.

    Your outrageous position: If there is no law on the books, do what you want. How dare you. Human beings don't need to be told it is wrong to sexually molest a child, own another human being, or protect the disenfranchised. Thank God you don't know what you're talking about.

    The way the real law works: If any system is doing something morally reprehensible, it's only a matter of time until a revolution occurs, new laws are written. And the wrongdoers PAY.

    You also state:

    We all should know that most nation's codes of law have for centuries precluded the punishment of children for the crimes of thier parents

    By this same rationale, children should not BENEFIT from the crimes of their parents, either.

    DUH. The children of people who commited criminal acts LIKE MURDER are still today holding positions of responsibility on Foundations that Daddy's money created.

    It is blood money.

    If this little treatise was written by an 'attorney', I'd like to suggest he return the money for his law scholarship, as it was money wasted.

    And Peckerwood, why not just post under your real name instead of creating a new identity to hide behind?


  • Peckerwood


    First of all, I never addressed you directly so for you to assume that I was referencing you in any way is somewhat conseited and egocentric of you. This thread is not about you or your beliefs alone. It is concerned with whether or not Americans desended from slaves have a LEGAL right to receive reparations. I guarantee that before this question is closed, it will be decided by the judicical branch using tenets of law, not 'gut instinct' or even morals.

    Secondly, the US constitution protects our citizens from laws that attempt to make penalties retroactive (coincedentally slaves were not counted as full citizens, but only 3/5ths, and only for purposes of determining representation and taxation amoung the several states; Article 1, US Constitution) Morally, how can you justify telling a citizen that they are free to pursue some course of action, then turn around and hold them criminally responsible for those actions that may now have become criminal? You can't according to the laws that regulate law-making.

    I am reluctant to comment on tobacco cases, for lack of knowledge of the details of those cases, but I believe that they settled those complaints, without ever admitting wrong doing, however If it had come down to a judment, I can assure you it would not have been based on wether or not they had the moral right to sell their product, but rather, if they had neglected to inform consumers of known heath risks, and conspired to supress that information. These are laws that may have been broken, perhaps based upon morals, but you need to understand that no amount of morals alone would have resulted in a legal judgment against them. This is the way law works. You are right you could change the laws, but you couldn't make anyone pay until it is broken while it is in effect. By the way, this is fundamental civil right. You don't mean to tell me you support violations of our civil rights, do you? It's amazing how you can determine, all by yourself, whose rights are more significant.

    Preserving the civil liberties of ALL citizens is important here, not any one individual or group, at the expense of another.

  • LDH
    These are laws that may have been broken, perhaps based upon morals, but you need to understand that no amount of morals alone would have resulted in a legal judgment against them. This is the way law works. You are right you could change the laws, but you couldn't make anyone pay until it is broken while it is in effect.

    You are correct. My only point is that, when it's time to pay up, it is very painful and always resisted.

    No one has addressed my core argument. I would like it if you could.

    The children of criminals can't be punished, rightly so. Why then do we allow them to benefit from those crimes? If, it is as they say "I never kept slaves why should I be punished?" then don't you feel it would be just for them to surrender the wealth built on the backs of slaves and factory workers?

    We do know now that things like slavery and workplace safety violations are crimes. So why are the children of criminals permitted to keep the blood money? Why shouldn't it be distributed to charities to help the needy?

    And I apologise for appearing egocentric. I know you weren't addressing me personally. I just wanted to compare your remarks to mine,


    PS speaking of reparations, where was all this clatter when the US GOVERNMENT (read :you the taxpayer) was shelling out $20,000 to each Japanese interred during WWII?

  • bigboi
    I've said three or four times it is not about race it is about socio-economics.

    I guess the root cause is in fact socio-economic. However a person's paintjob plays a helluva part today even though most ppl won't admit it.

    I saw the African-American playwright August Wilson(?) doing an interview on 60 minutes. He endured extreme racism during the early part of his life. Everyday, he said while attending a predominately white school he would have a note saying "Nigger go home!' on his desk. It bothered him so much that he stopped going to school altogether. To hide the fact that he wasn't attending anymore he would go to the library and read books during school hours. This of course spawned his intense love for writing and provided the foundation for what has become one of the most distinguished careers in literature in the history of the nation.

    Yet, this man who overcame so much still suns up the difference between blacks and whites in America this way:

    Using two relatively recent incidents he says:

    "A black man standing in the vestibule of his home is shot 41 times by police."

    "A white man standing with a rifle aimed at the home of the Leader of the Free World is negotiated with for fifteen minutes then shot once in the leg."

    I think there is some substance to this.



  • DakotaRed

    LDH, there was indeed an outcry for the reparations to the Japanese Americans interred during WWII. There is also a distinct difference in the reparations. These people were still living that had their proerty and homes seized as they were forcibly moved off to internment camps. Of those not still living, it was their offspring that also were sent to those camps that were reimbursed. The Japanese were relocated under the law, but due entirely to war hysteria. After the war, their proerties were not returned.

    Of the Japanese I knew and worked with in the early 80s, none even wanted the money or felt they were due anything. They felt honor at serving in the military and fighting for the US.

    Lew W

  • funkyderek
    Do YOU honestly believe that if these two brothersone white the other blackapplied for the same jobs, bank loans, had the same run-ins with the police, etc the black man with exactly the same economic and social background wouldnt get shot down (perhaps literally) ten times more than his white half-brother? If so, you must not live in the good ole US of A.

    Hmmm, first of all I don't live in the good ole US of A. I live in Ireland. You can tell from my profile.

    Secondly, I agree that racism seems to be endemic in the USA. I do not agree, however, that the best way to end racism is for the government to distinguish between people based on their skin colour. There is no such thing as positive discrimination. Discrimination based on skin colour is wrong, and should be stamped out, not written into law.

  • Peckerwood


    I appreciate the notable change in tone in your last post. I think I have already addressed your key point, but I will try to put it another way, for clarity. Your point hinges on someone commiting a crime, if no crime occured, the point dissolves, right? What I am saying is that when these events took place they were not crimes by the standards of the day. The 9th Amendment states:

    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

    So, even if a right to own slaves was not in the constition of that time, it didn't disallow it either.

    Americans detained for being of Japanesse decent, had their civil rights violated. The uneqivocal language of the Constitution of the United States that the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, and despite the Fifth Amendment's command that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. The difference is the due process of law statement, and that slavery had been abolished already. Slavery is the loss of liberty among other things, but due process was upheld for slaves, by the common law that slavery was legal.

    I am not asking anyone to like it, I certainly do not look at that time as our best, but please dont defend anyone telling me we broke any law and must pay damages.

    We have to stop hating one another. Bigboi, have you ever seen or heard of a black person doing something as equally heineous to a white person? I think you have. Why? Racially motivated hate. Its the same on both sides my friends. Lets try to look at both sides of the larger picture before we jump to conclusions. Whites were indeed slaves too at one time. That doesnt make it right, but it should make us equal, in the larger scheme of things. Sometimes I secretly wish aliens would invade the Earth so mankind can truely come together and see just how alike we are, but I fear once we kicked some alien butt and they left, we would go right back to squabbling again, so whats the point?

    I recommend people listen to what the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson has to say. I havent heard all he has to say, but what I have heard makes sense to me.

    LDR, I have a question for you, do white people have the right to form a group that peacfully advances our race? without being automatically labeled racist? What about losing a job, although I may have been more qualified, due to affirmative action? Doesnt that violate my 5th amendment right to persuit of happiness? or equal protections under the law? This is the context of my life and the lives of many whites that are frustrated because we already are paying for what our ancesters did, and now they want more, and more and more, when does it stop?

    tired...must sleep....I will seek the answers more tomorrow

    G'nite all

  • Navigator

    Larry-We are not victims unless we choose to see ourselves as such. I referred you to the teachings of Jesus because you cited him in your original post as an example of a protestor. I would be interested in your proof that nothing he said was original. In my opinion, the so called Reparations movement will create a new group of victims and lead to the very opposite of the things that Dr. King stood for. How will you deal with the children of mixed race? Will the child of a black man and a whilte woman only be entitled to half reparations? How about the child of a black man and an Indian woman? Will they get double? My grandfather emigrated after the civil war. I owe you nothing.

    Analysis-You are so right!

  • Trauma_Hound
    Oh bullsh*t!!!!!

    Iis so easy to say that you are not affected, because you are able to reap the benefits of being white without even realizing.

    It is quite a funny thing that there are so many more people of color incarcerated, ever stopped to ask yourself why? They cant afford lawyers, they are pulled over more often, they dont get the put on the back and let off as easy BECAUSE of the color of their skin? Have you ever looked at the penalities for drug possession, and compared them to, I dunno, rich fat bastards running off with peoples retirements? I bet you have never been followed when you shopped at the mall for baby clothes, or told that you would have polka-dotted babies if you have a mixed baby. (I have!)

    So what if your people did not get here until after slavery, you still benefit from the good ole boy's club because of your color. The fact that you cannot even acknowledge that there is privelege based on color in this country proves how well entrenched it is.

    Really now? Actually I have been followed, I've also been pulled over, and had a gun shoved in my face, no as a matter of fact I didn't benifit. I grew up pore. Ya I've had the privilage of not getting a job, where I had more qaulifications then the other person, because they were a minority. Don't get me wrong I don't hate any race, however I've also been told "Why aren't you with your own kind?" while walking down the street with my black girlfriend on my arm, by a black man. Racism runs on both sides of the tracks. I've had plenty of racist remarks thrown at me by black folks, it's wrong no matter who's doing it. My ancestors were Irish potato farmers, they didn't own slaves, plus I have a little native american in me, I think holding people accountable for what they're ancestors did, is racism in itself, you should only hold a person to what they do, not what someone else did.

  • LDH

    Trauma you are right, racism is rampant on BOTH sides of the street....but again I will say it is not about race.

    Pecker (LOL) says:

    Americans detained for being of Japanesse decent, had their civil rights violated my knowledge, Civil Rights laws were not passed until the 60's. Do you know something I don't know?

    You also state:

    What I am saying is that when these events took place they were not crimes by the standards of the day

    I disagree. The case I am thinking of the Cinque and the ship Amistad, but I need to run now so I will cite more later on that topic.

    Dakota says:

    These people were still living that had their proerty and homes seized as they were forcibly moved off to internment camps.

    Hmmm....let me think about that one. Which is worse, being moved off of your home and property for a few years or being ripped away from your home and property AND FAMILY for the rest of your life?

    I think I'll take the Japanese version of discrimination, thank you very much. At the very least, they were allowed to remain WITH their families. They still retain their culture because the families were not forcible separated. I just finished reading a brand new book about the Japanese Interrment experience. When I compare that book, ALL FIRST HAND accounts--it pales in comparison to the savageness of slavery.

    Navigator says:

    Larry-We are not victims unless we choose to see ourselves as such. I

    Dude that is pure psycho babble. The ones who are being victimized daily are the children.

    What no one seems to understand is that we need MORE Bill Gates, not fewer. We need to provide quality access to education and medical care to ALL children, regardless of their parent's socio-economic condition.

    How many potential Bill Gates are being left behind through no fault of their own?


Share this