 |
| |
|
|
Brundlefly
|
 |
United States
Nov 2001
time: 00:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Floyd
Two issues with this.
First of all, it is an obvious fact that descendants of slaves are better off being in the US than they would be in Africa. OK, fine, there are probably individual exceptions to this, but by and large, these people benefitted from slavery - they're here in the US rather than in Africa. This doesn't justify slavery, but it certainly doesn't make me think these people need reparations, either.
My smartass solution is this: for the black people demanding reparations, ask them if they would rather be in the US or in Africa. If they say the US, tell them to shut the **** up. If they say Africa, give them reparations in the form of a one way plane ticket on Air Rwanda.
My real solution, of course, is just say shut the **** up.
Secondly, if reparations should only be paid by descendants of slave holders, don't you run into a MASSIVE privacy issue? You'll have the government digging into the past of millions of Americans, whether they had slave owning ancestors or not, in an attempt to find who should pay and who shouldn't. And what if these people literally cannot afford to pay? Should we confiscate the homes of these people? Maybe put them on the street? Preposterous. |
Well put! Agree 100%
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Space05us
And no one has yet to justify giving people reperations just because they got sold into slavery. Ive also already pointed out that Africans are the people who sold the Europeans the slaves, wether they were black or white made no difference to the Europeans, they were cheap!
|
Actually, this isn't quite correct. Getting slaves from Africa was a damned expensive process - you had to pay those who captured them some trinkets, weapons, or what not for their prisoners, then you had to pay the crews of the slavers, had to provision them and deal with ship losses, then the majority of your cargo died on you - probably something about sanitation and being able to breathe, what with them chained into those narrow spaces and the usual shipboard diet of the time.
Getting white European scum out of the debtor's prisons or jails for petty offenders was much cheaper - you could even con a bunch of "free" Europeans into indenturement to get them over.
Trouble is, the white European scum died off in the fields too quick, and weren't malaria resistant, so the plantation owners went for the more durable, but more expensive Africans. They just got slavery, instead of five year indenturements or terms of bondage with a nine-month life expectancy in the fields. So let's give reparations to the descendants of our oppressed white bonded and indentured servants too, if we can find any living descendants of them. 
quote:
Which brings up an even better point!
Why arent "African" Americans trying to sue Europeans nations that held most of the power during the era when most of the slaves were brought over?
off the subject Im going to start calling myself European American! |
Because they don't have wacky tort systems that allow for the threat of bullshit like this, nor wacky governments that even talk about such nonsense.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:29
|
|
I am against reparations, but not for most of, what I would call absurd, rationalizations given against it in this thread. To follow money created by slavery would be much more simple than many of the other cases brought forwards, speically from still fucntioning insititutions, like Banksm insurance companies, whatever.
The fact is that reparations would do nothing to imporve the situation of the African Americna community (no, there are no European Americans..but there are italian Americans, Irish Americans, German Americans, all of them with nice parades, ethnic neighborhoods, so on, so if you happen to unfortunitelly be from a boring white people, like Scandinavians or British, your bad luck.). Firts of all, a direct method of distributing money would be impossible, and not all blakcs deserve money. Second, there atre no public insitutions that could rightfully be given such money, and since the only places form which such money could be collected would be institutions such a private companies that can be shown to hav profited in the past from slavery, hte amounts would not be earth shattering, but then questions about foreing subsidaries would pop up. Finally, such money would basically all get used up to buy commercail products anyway.
I agree with PLATO that it is more improtant to carry out social porgrams to imporve the quality of life in the community.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-07-2003 20:50
define black community. And no one has yet to justify giving people reperations just because they got sold into slavery. Ive also already pointed out that Africans are the people who sold the Europeans the slaves, wether they were black or white made no difference to the Europeans, they were cheap! Which brings up an even better point! Why arent "African" Americans trying to sue Europeans nations that held most of the power during the era when most of the slaves were brought over? 
Sorry. 
|