Blogcritics: Comments on Against Reparations

Comment by Al Barger

Thu, 6 Nov 2003 00:21:25 EST

Diva, could you please elucidate about the "BBBBs (Buffoonish Band of Bigoted Brothers)"? [comment #24] To wit, and what for, and break it on down for a Kentuckian. What exactly do you think is the BBBB problem? Are they/we (I assume you consider ME a member) evil White Devils bent on subjugating and re-enslaving dark people? Or is it that you think we're just stupid, too dumb to understand your great elucidations and sophisticated legal perspectives? Is it that we're wicked or merely extraordinarily stupid? Enquiring honkies want to know!

Comment by Ron Mwangaguhunga

Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:53:49 EST

Thank you all for a serious discussion of this very important issue. BTW: I would not be against bringing suit against, say, Aetna Insurance or the Hartford Courant, who benefitted at the corporate level from slavery. If a descendant of slaves were to bring PRIVATE suit against these companies that redress is not incompatible with my beliefs.

Comment by TDavid

Tue, 4 Nov 2003 10:22:02 EST

debbie raises a good point. The estate tax, for those who pass the wealth threshold/exemption, is the greatest tax gift those that pass for delivery to the rest of the country (this is of course assuming that the government spends these tax dollars responsibly and it is my contention that they do not do). That tax can be as high as 55% of the entire value of the estate and is payable within 9 months after the death -- in cash. Husband can leave to wife, but wife dies it goes to estate or to trust fund. And there is still a taxable event. So to presume that those who die do not give back to others in this country could be flawed, depending on the size of their estate. The exemptions, last time I checked for husband and wife were around 1.2 million dollars. Now, before anybody says, wait, most people don't have that kind of wealth in their estate when they die think about those 1-3% who die with mega millions (or guys like Bill Gates who will die with billions, if he doesn't give it all away first). The estate tax is one of the great equalizers in the tax system between the rich and poor. If they didn't give all their life, then a significant portion of their wealth will be absorbed after their death. Now there are ways for the super rich to buy products like life insurance to pay off the estate tax, but there is no way to escape it if you pass the threshold. Legally, anyway. Therefore, it is my position based on this that the government needs to balance the books and run the finances like a business. If we had excess money I'd be all for helping out as many different groups as possible, but we have a debt that continues to grow. Someday that debt has to be evaluated. Under the Clinton presidency at least we heard about the debt. The Bush presidency has been on a spending spree. Yes, some of that spending was necessary, but what about the debt. The economy is more important than reparations to African Americans. That's my current position. I'd be happy to discuss how the economy is not more important than reparations?

Comment by debbie

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 23:11:35 EST

"Today, if someone was found guilty of enslavement they would be held responsible physically and financially. If they were unaccountable their next of kin would incur the debt. How is this situation any different?" What state is this in? You cannot force hold the next of kin accountable for any debt let alone criminal debt. The only instance that it might apply is a spouse might be accountable for a debt that his/her spouse incurred before dying. Anything but a spouse and it isn't happening. Any outstanding debts are paid by the estate of the deceased. We have programs in place to give a helping hand to the underprivleged. Those come out of my taxes to help my "fellow countrymen" and I'm ok with that. I want to have a safety net to help out those that need it. We also have laws on the books to prosecute those that practice racial discrimination. I'm fine with these too, I glad that we have them because there will always be the few idiots in society. I don't have a problem with any of that, but I do have a problem with being punished for something that I did not do.

Comment by Dew

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 19:48:32 EST

Craig, I would have to disagree since for a long time Blacks were not allowed participation in these programs. Our oppression did not stop when the slaves were freed. The only reason the Civil Rights Movement was so effective was because the Black dollar was recognized as being every bit as green as the White dollar not because we were recognized as human beings.

This country put a group of people in situations because of slavery and as a result of that oppression haven't there been many programs to try and help the poor in order to try and help give everyone, especially those who were knocked backward by slavery?

I am not trying to nitpick here but you can not be knocked backwards from a position you were not ever in. We have not ever had equal footing, therefore all the programs designed to help 'people' in general still put us four steps behind. That is why there needs to be programs for those who were directly affected by slavery so they can be allowed to catch up.

Most of the time you do because you have a relationship with them and want to take care of them.

I have not picked the first bail of cotton. I do not know what it is like to have someone take away from me the most innate civil liberties I take for granted. And I agree that for the most part reparations is charity. But this country (not just the South) benefitted from the labor and inventions of African Slaves. No restitution was ever made for these wrongdoings. The effects of that are still trying to be overcome. No it is not fair for you to have to pay for something that is not your fault but its not fair for me to have fight three times as hard just to be on level playing ground. The ramifications of slavery are so wide spread that it can not be trivialized by saying 'get over it'. Does every person who has dark skin deserve a handout? No. But today if I go anywhere and do a job I am compensated for my services. If that company withholds my funds they can be held liable not only for what they owe but for interest on the time it was withheld. Today, if someone was found guilty of enslavement they would be held responsible physically and financially. If they were unaccountable their next of kin would incur the debt. How is this situation any different? The owners of slaves families' are still spending slave money find them and hold them accountable but something should be done rather than shrugging it off as a goof of yesteryear. Debbie does have a point in that a relationship should exist in order to warrant helping those in need. I would have thought being that these are your fellow countrymen that would be enough, but I assume that is too much like right. Imagine if all military personnel looked through those eyes.

Comment by TDavid

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 18:17:51 EST

Mac Diva - One way conversations seem to be your speciality. I really don't know why I'm bothering to type this because since it makes sense, you'll probably just blow it off. Since you act like you are so enlightened on this subject, but rarely back it up when people challenge you directly (instead you run away and hide claiming that those who oppose you "can't grasp the subject" or are "bigots"), then please calmly, rationally and without personal attack educate me as to [b]how as a white male, directly or indirectly, I've [b]benefitted[/b] from discrimination?[/b] I said above that I had an open mind on this reparations thing and I do, but I'd like to hear some facts without BS, and since you continue to write on and on about this, you ought to be able to give me some concise, logical answers with necessary third party, unbiased data that I can verify and validate. Today I see lots of reverse discrimination for white males in mid to large contracting jobs where a minority owner (black, woman, asian, hispanic, etc) can get bid preference over a white male. Why should any jobs be bid out this way? I'm not in the contracting business but if I was, I think I'd be a bit miffed about this. Discrimination has started to swing back the other direction, IMO, and it is people with a point of view like yourself that seem to keep pushing for more and more from an essentially bankrupt account. People expecting hardworking taxpayers like me to fill hands up with $$$ when the dollars are in shorter supply. If I don't want to do that without receiving a good explanation why, then I'm labeled something awful like a bigot or treated like some terrible, insensitive person. Is that really accurate? That's just an illogical way to deal with an issue -- any issue. Especially when the hand is out looking for money, it should first explain why it can't make its own money and why it's so necessary for me to add to the charity account. I see these reparations as charity and I don't think that's the right way to look at it, but sorry, I need more data to understand where this is so necessary. So please just for a brief minute try and analyze my question without inserting a bunch of BS opinions and I'll be happy to listen and respond respectfully. I bet others would too. You act like you never pick fights when in fact in many threads lately, you have clearly been the aggressor. The problem with you isn't always what you say, Mac Diva (though lately it is), it's usually how you say it. It's the little things you add to the end of what you are trying to say that get your point lost in a personal attack. For a writer where words are so vital, this seems like a very glaring error on your part. Or maybe "why" is just too complicated a question here, and this will be ignored like most good, logical questions that are asked of you seem to be. I won't hold my breath. Maybe somebody else can explain this to me in more depth. Thank you in advance :-)

Comment by FilteringCraig

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 18:05:55 EST

Not once did I say there was no merit to the long-term negative effects of slavery that are no doubt still in existence today. What I was saying is that maybe we ought to consider a lot of the programs that are already in place today, a part of the reparations, because in my mind, they could already be taking place. It's not like we don't have programs. True maybe we need more, but let's not forget that we have been moving on this to a certain extent for a long time.

Comment by Eric Olsen

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 18:04:57 EST

I said racism is real and the legacy of slavery enduring. This is why I have always favored affirmative action. But it is very difficult to fairly transport guilt and privilege from groups to individuals and vice versa. And fairness is what we are talking about. That is why I think the time has come to move beyond race to address underprivilege in education and health in general in an effort to level the field for individuals rather than classes of people.

Comment by Chris Arabia

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 18:02:31 EST

mac, i directed several substantive questions to you and you chose to ignore them in favor of demonizing and insulting--and not for the first time. if you are so much smarter than i, why are you unable to answer my questions? if i am as stupid and evil as you imply, why did you heartily endorse my suggested resolution of the confederate mascot problem? is the idea that i could share some but not all of your views too profound? assuming you are unwilling or unable to address those questions, please address this one: why do you constantly denigrate the intelligence and integrity of people who disagree with you? so we can properly assess your endless claims of intellectual superiority, why don't you tell us more about your intellectual pedigree? every argument you sidestep and every opponent you demonize is further confirmation...

Comment by Mac Diva

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 17:34:32 EST

But, you benefitted from the discrimination, Debbie. All white people have and do. Even those who immigrated the previous day. (That is what Ron wants to get a piece of, but full white privilege is only available to fully white people. Wannabes aren't eligible.) It is striking that apparently Dew and I are the only people on the thread who have even considered the continuing injuries of slavery. It is not a hard concept to grasp. Many injuries have longterm consequences, impacting more than the injured party. Consider a major tort such as losing a limb or paralysis, for example. When most people in a society are responsible for or have benefitted from a horrible injury, as with slavery, they all have a stake in it. This thread has taken on an interesting bifurcation. There is the usual ranting and name calling from the Blogcritics I think of as the BBBBs (Buffoonish Band of Bigoted Brothers) and a serious discussion of why a legal theory of reparations is not nonsense, as Ron claims. It is the latter that it was my intention to stimulate. However, since they have nothing substantive to contribute to any conversation, I am not surprised to see the BBBBs doing all they can do -- blather.

Comment by debbie

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 16:30:09 EST

Yes, we have been trying to change things over the years. "Is it Charles's fault he now has to raise his brother's son because terrorist decided to put a plane thru the twin towers?" No it is the terrorists fault. They are the ones that should be punished. Take the money from their estate or from the groups that trained them and sent them over here. "Is it the mother or father's fault they have to raise their grandchildren as their own because their daughter is addicted to heroine?" No it isn't, it is the grandparents choice on whether to raise the grandchildren or not. Most of the time you do because you have a relationship with them and want to take care of them. I don't think that these are very good comparisons. "If a cousin six times removed died leaving you as the only living relative to accept their inheritance worth millions, would you be so quick to give it back?" Receiving a gift is not the same thing as being saddled with punishment for something that you didn't do. If I wasn't left any money I wouldn't try to sue for any, because I know that I didn't earn it. "When is it okay to reap benefit with no loss?" When it is a gift from the rightful owner. The key words being a "gift" and "rightful owner".

Comment by Craig Lyndall

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 14:17:42 EST

Just a question, but wouldn't you consider a lot of the programs in place today to bring up all citizens who have financial hardships similar to reparations? This country put a group of people in situations because of slavery and as a result of that oppression haven't there been many programs to try and help the poor in order to try and help give everyone, especially those who were knocked backward by slavery? I am not saying that it is proportionate or disproportionate, but what is welfare, food stamps, housing subsidies, etc? Haven't we been doing these things for a long time? Maybe we need additional programs, but it seems to me that reparations have been paid and received for a long time through programs with no pre-determined length.

Comment by Dew

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 13:53:37 EST

The fact of the matter here is that Blacks are still fighting for equal footing in this country as a result of slavery. Monetary reparations may not be the answer but something (even if it is no more than some sort of tax relief) has to be done. The problem on the receiving end is there will always exist someone who will abuse the system. The problem on the giving end is that, people who share Debbie's pov will argue it's not their fault. Why should they have to pay? Is it Charles's fault he now has to raise his brother's son because terrorist decided to put a plane thru the twin towers? Is it the mother or father's fault they have to raise their grandchildren as their own because their daughter is addicted to heroine? No, it is not, although they end up being held responsible. If a cousin six times removed died leaving you as the only living relative to accept their inheritance worth millions, would you be so quick to give it back? I mean you never knew them and you certainly took no hand in helping to earn the money, why should you be privileged to spend it? When is it okay to reap benefit with no loss? We all want better race relations, less poverty, more education but when it requires too much effort or too much money from us directly those issues become less important. It's the same as this War situation. I damn sure hate the fact 87 billion is going towards Iraq reform (?) but I want to be assured that I am protected as a citizen. I hate the fact that Social Security is plaguing my pay stub every pay period but I long to help the elderly trying to survive. I realize I can not have it both ways. A wrong was done and there should be retribution to make those things right since the waves of those wrongdoings are still in effect. I personally do not agree with monetary reparations, but I do see where it would be a start at repairing 400 years of economic oppression. Unfortunately it is far too late to correct the emotional damage suffered by those who actually lived thru slavery.

Comment by debbie

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:50:26 EST

That is why I don't agree with reparations.... I don't think that I should be saddled with the punishment for something that I did not take part in. If you do this then how far back should you go? Should you have to pay "now" for something that your great great great grandfather did? What if he comitted a murder, should you be "sued" and forced to pay for something that you were even alive for, let alone responsible for? Don't kid yourself, if this is allowed, the lawyers will push it even further to allow any kind of suit go forward (their pay is based on a percentage of the award)for any kind of wrong in past generations. That's what scares me!

Comment by Chris Arabia

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:30:49 EST

"there are some people here to see you." "are they with mac diva?" "i don't think so."

Comment by Chris

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:10:25 EST

I think this is somewhat appropriate: Prince Akeem: Sir, I was wondering, did you catch the professional football contest on television last night? Cleo McDowell: No, I didn't. Prince Akeem: Oh, it was a most amazing game. The Giants of New York took on the Packers of Green Bay. The Giants triumphed by kicking a pigskin ball through a big "H". A most ripping victory! Cleo McDowell: Son... I'm just going to tell you this one time. If you want to keep working here, stay off the drugs.

Comment by Craig Lyndall

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 10:53:58 EST

That's kind of a limited world view after X number of generations, certainly none of us, unless we are over 100 years of age were slave owners. That shouldn't be at the heart of your argument. If you believe in reparations, certainly it would be considered a societal debt that all Americans would have to pay for.

Comment by debbie

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 10:47:49 EST

If you believe that only the guilty should be punished, then how can you be for reparations? I've never owned slaves, nor have I made any policy concerning minorities. Why should I be punished?

Comment by Chris Arabia

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 10:25:15 EST

mac, you couldn't have proven my point any more effectively if you had written, "i agree 100% with what chris arabia wrote." thank you! schwing!

Comment by TDavid

Mon, 3 Nov 2003 04:04:22 EST

Re: Reparations? Put me down ATM as a "no" vote. I've yet to read one compelling "for" argument, but I still have an open mind. Re: Resident Troll? I suppose there are some similarities, Craig. She must be on some kind of mission to alienate herself from almost everybody here with comments like this: And, frankly, I've yet to encounter anyone at Blogcritics who makes me doubt myself intellectually. Least of all? Chris Arabia. Richard Pryor - freebased cocaine in 1980, seriously burning over half his body. Mac Diva - writes in 2003, burning bridges with 99.9% of those who she comes into contact with that frequent Blogcritics.

Comment by Craig Lyndall

Sun, 2 Nov 2003 23:50:11 EST

Could have fooled me, quoting Richard Pryor and all.

Comment by Mac Diva

Sun, 2 Nov 2003 23:47:33 EST

I've said nothing about all African immigrants. But, one who shows up hoping to score brownie points by attacking African-Americans deserves the scrutiny of himself and his motives he is getting. And, frankly, I've yet to encounter anyone at Blogcritics who makes me doubt myself intellectually. Least of all? Chris Arabia.

Comment by Chris Arabia

Sun, 2 Nov 2003 23:31:33 EST

mac, why do sing the praises of an unemotional approach and then fill your posts with emotional malice? can't you disagree with people without name calling and condescension? do you think your constant proclamations of self-superiority do anything more than advertise your own intellectual insecurity? because you ignored my previous post, i'll infer that you were unable to rebut it.

Comment by Craig Lyndall

Sun, 2 Nov 2003 23:22:39 EST

Don't you find it ironic that this is about racism which is lumping people together and then you go about lumping all African immigrants together calling them brown-nosing ass kissers to the right-wing and/or white people?

Comment by Mac Diva

Sun, 2 Nov 2003 18:56:37 EST

I don't believe reparations, in the sense of payment of actual damages, will occur. There is too much contempt for African-Americans among the general population for most of it to believe the group deserves to be compensated for the injuries of slavery and discrimination. Indeed, if ending de jure segregation had been put to a vote, we would still be living under Jim Crow. However, I believe the legal community's reparations movement (which has little to do with the excesses of Afrocentric activists on the topic) will eventually produce results. Those results will likely come as a response to pressure, not because Congress' hearts and minds are in the right place. That is the goal of the Crits -- to pressure the government into providing meaningful redress in regard to health, education and welfare for African-Americans, who are disproportionately impacted by inequities in those areas. Other disfavored groups, including Chicanos, Indians and the white poor, will also benefit from such programs. The author of this entry, who I already know from the ad rag he edited, has greatly underestimated good lawyers, like those studying reparations. A smart lawyer is possibly the least emotional kind of person on Earth. If there were not viable factual reasons for being involved, the Crits would not have devoted more than a decade to developing a legal theory for reparations.