# The value of slavery?



## gallantwarrior

What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?


----------



## Asclepias

Here is a piece I found. 
How America Should Pay Reparations


----------



## TNHarley

The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?


No one would need pay into any fund. They would need only to pay their taxes as scheduled.


----------



## DarkFury

*NOT ONE DIME.*


----------



## Toro

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?



We shouldn't pay reparations.

Why would I want to pay off some crackers just because we freed all the black people?


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations


Thank you.  There are good points there, but leaves it up to individuals to determine their qualification, and to determine the amount acceptable to each.  At least once (that I know of), such a program of reparation has been implemented and paid for: Black Farmers to Receive Payouts in $1.2 Billion from Federal Lawsuit.  It was fraught with fraud and abuse and left too many legitimate claimants unrewarded.
I'm actually looking for your calculations and how you determine them.  Do you not consider the myriad of other programs, like Affirmative Action, that addressed past discrimination, to have been at least partially helpful?


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

TNHarley said:


> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD


Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Just wanted to throw this in here - be back later

*Wage theft* is the illegal practice of not paying workers for all of their work including; violating minimum *wage* laws, not paying overtime, forcing workers to work off the clock, and much more. It is a major problem statewide.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  There are good points there, but leaves it up to individuals to determine their qualification, and to determine the amount acceptable to each.  At least once (that I know of), such a program of reparation has been implemented and paid for: Black Farmers to Receive Payouts in $1.2 Billion from Federal Lawsuit.  It was fraught with fraud and abuse and left too many legitimate claimants unrewarded.
> I'm actually looking for your calculations and how you determine them.  Do you not consider the myriad of other programs, like Affirmative Action, that addressed past discrimination, to have been at least partially helpful?
Click to expand...

The Black Farmers payout didnt have anything to do with slavery. That was a seperate issue.

*"This is the second round of funding for black farmers. Thousands received payments in 1999 as part of a settlement in a class-action suit over allegations of widespread discrimination by federal officials who denied loans and other assistance to black farmers because of their race."
*
I havent made any calculations simply because I think its futile to waste time on something whites will fight to their dying breath.  As long as whites control the system its not going to happen. 

Why would I consider AA when AA has not been a Black only benefit? Matter of fact white women are the largest beneficiaries of AA which has increased the economic gap between whites and Blacks.  There simply has never ever been a payout for the lost wages Blacks were denied during slavery.


----------



## gallantwarrior

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
Click to expand...

And am asking about wages owed at the time of death of someone held as a slave in the US at the time of his/her death, plus interest.  Part of the question addresses how much interest.


----------



## JGalt

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?



Reparations are out of the the question. But slaves did have some intrinsic value during that period..

Measuring Worth - Measuring the Value of a Slave


----------



## Syriusly

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?


Reparations are not going to be paid. 

Should they have been in 1865? or 1895? Possibly. 

Not now.


----------



## gallantwarrior

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Just wanted to throw this in here - be back later
> 
> *Wage theft* is the illegal practice of not paying workers for all of their work including; violating minimum *wage* laws, not paying overtime, forcing workers to work off the clock, and much more. It is a major problem statewide.


Governed by current wage laws of the time referred to, what where those amounts minimum wage, overtime, off-the-clock, etc, at the time when such wages were earned?  Do you want to go into a state-by-state analysis of the time period?


----------



## Montrovant

From what I've seen, the posters on this site that support reparations do so for more than just slavery.


----------



## Asclepias

The amount owed is simply mind boggling. Its almost like trying to envision how big the universe is.  When you through in punitive damages it gets even bigger.


----------



## JGalt

Syriusly said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Reparations are not going to be paid.
> 
> Should they have been in 1865? or 1895? Possibly.
> 
> Not now.
Click to expand...


Agreed. The blood of 620,000 Americans killed in the Civil War, is reparations enough.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  There are good points there, but leaves it up to individuals to determine their qualification, and to determine the amount acceptable to each.  At least once (that I know of), such a program of reparation has been implemented and paid for: Black Farmers to Receive Payouts in $1.2 Billion from Federal Lawsuit.  It was fraught with fraud and abuse and left too many legitimate claimants unrewarded.
> I'm actually looking for your calculations and how you determine them.  Do you not consider the myriad of other programs, like Affirmative Action, that addressed past discrimination, to have been at least partially helpful?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Black Farmers payout didnt have anything to do with slavery. That was a seperate issue.
> 
> *"This is the second round of funding for black farmers. Thousands received payments in 1999 as part of a settlement in a class-action suit over allegations of widespread discrimination by federal officials who denied loans and other assistance to black farmers because of their race."
> *
> I havent made any calculations simply because I think its futile to waste time on something whites will fight to their dying breath.  As long as whites control the system its not going to happen.
> 
> Why would I consider AA when AA has not been a Black only benefit? Matter of fact white women are the largest beneficiaries of AA which has increased the economic gap between whites and Blacks.  There simply has never ever been a payout for the lost wages Blacks were denied during slavery.
Click to expand...

I think that more people would be more receptive if provided some definite numbers.  A vague claim of "some" money for "some" perceived hurt is probably much less helpful than someone actually posting a calculation of benefits denied.  If someone (maybe you) could make a concrete estimate of lost wages blacks were denied, plus interest, you might find a better reception for you claims.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> From what I've seen, the posters on this site that support reparations do so for more than just slavery.


There is case for that as well but we are only discussing slavery. We know that laws and policies were implemented to cheat and hold Blacks back like share cropping, vagrancy laws, Black codes, red lining, loan denial etc etc etc  but those are not part of the discussion now.


----------



## JGalt

Asclepias said:


> The amount owed is simply mind boggling. Its almost like trying to envision how big the universe is.  When you through in punitive damages it gets even bigger.



Just quit already. The idea of "reparations" is nothing but a "get rich quick" scheme dreamed about by people who want something for nothing.

You'd be better off going down to the local convenience store and buying a lottery ticket.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've seen, the posters on this site that support reparations do so for more than just slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> There is case for that as well but we are only discussing slavery. We know that laws and policies were implemented to cheat and hold Blacks back like share cropping, vagrancy laws, Black codes, red lining, loan denial etc etc etc  but those are not part of the discussion now.
Click to expand...

The article you cited does address many of those issues, too.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  There are good points there, but leaves it up to individuals to determine their qualification, and to determine the amount acceptable to each.  At least once (that I know of), such a program of reparation has been implemented and paid for: Black Farmers to Receive Payouts in $1.2 Billion from Federal Lawsuit.  It was fraught with fraud and abuse and left too many legitimate claimants unrewarded.
> I'm actually looking for your calculations and how you determine them.  Do you not consider the myriad of other programs, like Affirmative Action, that addressed past discrimination, to have been at least partially helpful?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Black Farmers payout didnt have anything to do with slavery. That was a seperate issue.
> 
> *"This is the second round of funding for black farmers. Thousands received payments in 1999 as part of a settlement in a class-action suit over allegations of widespread discrimination by federal officials who denied loans and other assistance to black farmers because of their race."
> *
> I havent made any calculations simply because I think its futile to waste time on something whites will fight to their dying breath.  As long as whites control the system its not going to happen.
> 
> Why would I consider AA when AA has not been a Black only benefit? Matter of fact white women are the largest beneficiaries of AA which has increased the economic gap between whites and Blacks.  There simply has never ever been a payout for the lost wages Blacks were denied during slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think that more people would be more receptive if provided some definite numbers.  A vague claim of "some" money for "some" perceived hurt is probably much less helpful than someone actually posting a calculation of benefits denied.  If someone (maybe you) could make a concrete estimate of lost wages blacks were denied, plus interest, you might find a better reception for you claims.
Click to expand...

I dont think whites would ever be receptive to any figure. Its easily in the trillions. Also its not a perceived hurt. Its a real theft of wages which have never been paid.  I am not looking for better reception. I dont care how whites feel about it. My argument is that its owed. Whites are unethical so I expect them to never want this country to pay its debts to Blacks because it would erase their white only AA that went on for centuries and one of the primary reasons the economic gap exists today.  Hell congress cant even pass a bill to research the issue. Congress is controlled by whites.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  There are good points there, but leaves it up to individuals to determine their qualification, and to determine the amount acceptable to each.  At least once (that I know of), such a program of reparation has been implemented and paid for: Black Farmers to Receive Payouts in $1.2 Billion from Federal Lawsuit.  It was fraught with fraud and abuse and left too many legitimate claimants unrewarded.
> I'm actually looking for your calculations and how you determine them.  Do you not consider the myriad of other programs, like Affirmative Action, that addressed past discrimination, to have been at least partially helpful?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Black Farmers payout didnt have anything to do with slavery. That was a seperate issue.
> 
> *"This is the second round of funding for black farmers. Thousands received payments in 1999 as part of a settlement in a class-action suit over allegations of widespread discrimination by federal officials who denied loans and other assistance to black farmers because of their race."
> *
> I havent made any calculations simply because I think its futile to waste time on something whites will fight to their dying breath.  As long as whites control the system its not going to happen.
> 
> Why would I consider AA when AA has not been a Black only benefit? Matter of fact white women are the largest beneficiaries of AA which has increased the economic gap between whites and Blacks.  There simply has never ever been a payout for the lost wages Blacks were denied during slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think that more people would be more receptive if provided some definite numbers.  A vague claim of "some" money for "some" perceived hurt is probably much less helpful than someone actually posting a calculation of benefits denied.  If someone (maybe you) could make a concrete estimate of lost wages blacks were denied, plus interest, you might find a better reception for you claims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont think whites would ever be receptive to any figure. Its easily in the trillions. Also its not a perceived hurt. Its a real theft of wages which have never been paid.  I am not looking for better reception. I dont care how whites feel about it. My argument is that its owed. Whites are unethical so I expect them to never want this country to pay its debts to Blacks because it would erase their white only AA that went on for centuries and one of the primary reasons the economic gap exists today.
Click to expand...

As a native american, I know you will be disappointed, Or maybe not.  You agree that you expect no better reception they you receive.  Oh, and given limited Federal funding, who do you think is owed the first round of retributions, blacks or native americans?


----------



## Asclepias

Here is another interesting link for the curious.

We Absolutely Could Give Reparations To Black People. Here's How. | HuffPost


----------



## Meathead

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?


The value of the lives of slaves was far higher than the lives of their descendants today.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  There are good points there, but leaves it up to individuals to determine their qualification, and to determine the amount acceptable to each.  At least once (that I know of), such a program of reparation has been implemented and paid for: Black Farmers to Receive Payouts in $1.2 Billion from Federal Lawsuit.  It was fraught with fraud and abuse and left too many legitimate claimants unrewarded.
> I'm actually looking for your calculations and how you determine them.  Do you not consider the myriad of other programs, like Affirmative Action, that addressed past discrimination, to have been at least partially helpful?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Black Farmers payout didnt have anything to do with slavery. That was a seperate issue.
> 
> *"This is the second round of funding for black farmers. Thousands received payments in 1999 as part of a settlement in a class-action suit over allegations of widespread discrimination by federal officials who denied loans and other assistance to black farmers because of their race."
> *
> I havent made any calculations simply because I think its futile to waste time on something whites will fight to their dying breath.  As long as whites control the system its not going to happen.
> 
> Why would I consider AA when AA has not been a Black only benefit? Matter of fact white women are the largest beneficiaries of AA which has increased the economic gap between whites and Blacks.  There simply has never ever been a payout for the lost wages Blacks were denied during slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think that more people would be more receptive if provided some definite numbers.  A vague claim of "some" money for "some" perceived hurt is probably much less helpful than someone actually posting a calculation of benefits denied.  If someone (maybe you) could make a concrete estimate of lost wages blacks were denied, plus interest, you might find a better reception for you claims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont think whites would ever be receptive to any figure. Its easily in the trillions. Also its not a perceived hurt. Its a real theft of wages which have never been paid.  I am not looking for better reception. I dont care how whites feel about it. My argument is that its owed. Whites are unethical so I expect them to never want this country to pay its debts to Blacks because it would erase their white only AA that went on for centuries and one of the primary reasons the economic gap exists today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> As a native american, I know you will be disappointed, Or maybe not.  You agree that you expect no better reception they you receive.  Oh, and given limited Federal funding, who do you think is owed the first round of retributions, blacks or native americans?
Click to expand...

I would say Blacks and only because native americans have already received payouts directly related to their issues with the US.. Federal funding isnt limited until the US disappears. Each year the US takes in taxes. Also not having it all isnt an excuse to not begin payment. Thats called being a bum and not addressing your debt..


----------



## Rambunctious

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be? Please be specific. What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?


Minus their room and board and medical care......


----------



## Rambunctious

If any of you could find a living former slave...let me know...I'll give whatever he or she needs....


----------



## Asclepias

Rambunctious said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be? Please be specific. What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Minus their room and board and medical care......
Click to expand...

Expenses incurred as a result of depriving people of their wages is not applicable to the equation.


----------



## Asclepias

Rambunctious said:


> If any of you could find a living former slave...let me know...I'll give whatever he or she needs....


You cant afford it. Youre on welfare as it is and the obligation is the US governments to rectify.


----------



## Rambunctious

Asclepias said:


> Expenses incurred as a result of depriving people of their wages is not applicable to the equation


The fact that they are all dead is applicable....


----------



## Asclepias

Rambunctious said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Expenses incurred as a result of depriving people of their wages is not applicable to the equation
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that they are all dead is applicable....
Click to expand...

Only if you dont understand what an estate is.  Obviously you lack the knowledge but thats not something everyone didnt already know about you.


----------



## Rambunctious

Asclepias said:


> Only if you dont understand what an estate is. Obviously you lack the knowledge but thats not something everyone didnt already know about you


I have an ancestor that was killed on his farm in New Hampshire by British Red coats....do I qualify for reparations?


----------



## Asclepias

Rambunctious said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only if you dont understand what an estate is. Obviously you lack the knowledge but thats not something everyone didnt already know about you
> 
> 
> 
> I have an ancestor that was killed on his farm in New Hampshire by British Red coats....do I qualify for reparations?
Click to expand...

Ask the British courts or better yet your attorney. What does that have to do with my point?


----------



## TNHarley

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
Click to expand...

Oh ok lol. I didnt know slave holders were still alive! My bad.
Someone call guiness book of world records!


----------



## Rambunctious

Asclepias said:


> Ask the British courts or better yet your attorney. What does that have to do with my point?


There is no one alive today that needs reparations for some poor soul that was held in slavery 200 years ago.....the entire notion is ridiculous...thank God Trump is placing common sense back onto the courts.....


----------



## Asclepias

Rambunctious said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ask the British courts or better yet your attorney. What does that have to do with my point?
> 
> 
> 
> There is no one alive today that needs reparations for some poor soul that was held in slavery 200 years ago.....the entire notion is ridiculous...thank God Trump is placing common sense back onto the courts.....
Click to expand...

No one asked for your opinion on if anyone was entitled to reparations. This discussion concerns the amount.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

gallantwarrior said:


> Governed by current wage laws of the time referred to, what where those amounts minimum wage, overtime, off-the-clock, etc, at the time when such wages were earned? Do you want to go into a state-by-state analysis of the time period?


As I indicated I just posted the information about wage theft to illustrate the point, that not only is it unethical to get people to work for you and then not pay them, but that it's unlawful as well and a significant current day problem.

I didn't have time to properly research this but did a quick perusal of a couple of these pages which you might find useful:

Google search on "what was the average salary in 1776?"
https://eml.berkeley.edu/~webfac/cromer/e211_f12/LindertWilliamson.pdf
Statistics of the United States, (including mortality, property, &c.,) in 1860 : comp. from the original returns and being the final exhibit of the eighth ...
Laborers' Average Hourly Rate of Wages, Weighted for United States


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Rambunctious said:


> There is no one alive today that needs reparations for some poor soul that was held in slavery 200 years ago.....the entire notion is ridiculous...thank God Trump is placing common sense back onto the courts.....


I have a cousin who was born in 1888 and passed away in 1987.  The adults in her life, including her own parents were born into a time when black people were still being held as slaves.  I met her before she passed away so even though I've never met anyone who was actually a slave, I have met with individuals who had family members who were held in slavery therefore for me this does not seem like "ancient" history.  

My cousin along with one of her daughters wrote a book entitled "Lemon Swamp and Other Places".  The following was written about the author (Mamie Garvin Fields) and the photograph following the text is the plantation from which my famility descended which is mentioned in the book.  

*Overview*
Lemon Swamp and Other Places: A Carolina Memoir by Mamie Garvin Fields, Karen E. Fields

Mamie Garvin Fields was born in Charleston, South Carolina in 1888. Though black, her family was gifted and she grew up not among house servants or sharecroppers but among artisans and professionals.

In LEMON SWAMP, she looks back on this all-but-forgotten community of friends and family, and on the wider social landscape of the segregationist South of her youth.

"LEMON SWAMP is wonderful. I think anyone interested in Southern history, black history, Charleston, or the struggles of women in society will find it thoroughly engaging." --Ernest Hollings, U.S. Senator

Middleton Place National Historic Landmark House Museum, Restaurant, Stable Yards & Gardens


----------



## there4eyeM

All the soldiers who died in the American Civil War.
The error of slavery cost America dear.
Debt paid.


----------



## dave p

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  There are good points there, but leaves it up to individuals to determine their qualification, and to determine the amount acceptable to each.  At least once (that I know of), such a program of reparation has been implemented and paid for: Black Farmers to Receive Payouts in $1.2 Billion from Federal Lawsuit.  It was fraught with fraud and abuse and left too many legitimate claimants unrewarded.
> I'm actually looking for your calculations and how you determine them.  Do you not consider the myriad of other programs, like Affirmative Action, that addressed past discrimination, to have been at least partially helpful?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Black Farmers payout didnt have anything to do with slavery. That was a seperate issue.
> 
> *"This is the second round of funding for black farmers. Thousands received payments in 1999 as part of a settlement in a class-action suit over allegations of widespread discrimination by federal officials who denied loans and other assistance to black farmers because of their race."
> *
> I havent made any calculations simply because I think its futile to waste time on something whites will fight to their dying breath.  As long as whites control the system its not going to happen.
> 
> Why would I consider AA when AA has not been a Black only benefit? Matter of fact white women are the largest beneficiaries of AA which has increased the economic gap between whites and Blacks.  There simply has never ever been a payout for the lost wages Blacks were denied during slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think that more people would be more receptive if provided some definite numbers.  A vague claim of "some" money for "some" perceived hurt is probably much less helpful than someone actually posting a calculation of benefits denied.  If someone (maybe you) could make a concrete estimate of lost wages blacks were denied, plus interest, you might find a better reception for you claims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont think whites would ever be receptive to any figure. Its easily in the trillions. Also its not a perceived hurt. Its a real theft of wages which have never been paid.  I am not looking for better reception. I dont care how whites feel about it. My argument is that its owed. Whites are unethical so I expect them to never want this country to pay its debts to Blacks because it would erase their white only AA that went on for centuries and one of the primary reasons the economic gap exists today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> As a native american, I know you will be disappointed, Or maybe not.  You agree that you expect no better reception they you receive.  Oh, and given limited Federal funding, who do you think is owed the first round of retributions, blacks or native americans?
Click to expand...

Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

dave p said:


> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.


And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.

One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Just wanted to throw this in here - be back later
> 
> *Wage theft* is the illegal practice of not paying workers for all of their work including; violating minimum *wage* laws, not paying overtime, forcing workers to work off the clock, and much more. It is a major problem statewide.


When a Holocaust survivor dies, the reparations stop.


----------



## dave p

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
Click to expand...

Who sold the slaves in the first place? People ( black ) from countries in Africa. Those countries made it legal to sell slaves lets have them belly up. Why aren't you going after the families of the slave owners?


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Indeependent said:


> When a Holocaust survivor dies, the reparations stop.


I wasn't aware of that but my comment was in response to someone who seemed to believe that if an employer owes wages to someone who dies, that he is then off the hook for those wages which is simply not true.


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> When a Holocaust survivor dies, the reparations stop.
> 
> 
> 
> I wasn't aware of that but my comment was in response to someone who seemed to believe that if an employer owes wages to someone who dies, that he is then off the hook for those wages which is simply not true.
Click to expand...

Explain.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Indeependent said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> When a Holocaust survivor dies, the reparations stop.
> 
> 
> 
> I wasn't aware of that but my comment was in response to someone who seemed to believe that if an employer owes wages to someone who dies, that he is then off the hook for those wages which is simply not true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Explain.
Click to expand...

Here


NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
Click to expand...


----------



## TNHarley

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> When a Holocaust survivor dies, the reparations stop.
> 
> 
> 
> I wasn't aware of that but my comment was in response to someone who seemed to believe that if an employer owes wages to someone who dies, that he is then off the hook for those wages which is simply not true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Explain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Who owes the descendent?


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> When a Holocaust survivor dies, the reparations stop.
> 
> 
> 
> I wasn't aware of that but my comment was in response to someone who seemed to believe that if an employer owes wages to someone who dies, that he is then off the hook for those wages which is simply not true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Explain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

That’s not an answer.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Indeependent said:


> That’s not an answer.


What is not an answer?


----------



## TNHarley

As if this is such a hard question 
Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s not an answer.
> 
> 
> 
> What is not an answer?
Click to expand...

Quote the Law, not a post by another user.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

TNHarley said:


> As if this is such a hard question
> Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?


Who created the harm?


----------



## TNHarley

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if this is such a hard question
> Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Who create the harm?
Click to expand...

People that died a long time ago.


----------



## irosie91

Asclepias said:


> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations




blacks were barred from the benefits of the  GI bill?


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if this is such a hard question
> Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Who create the harm?
Click to expand...

Quote the Law.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Indeependent said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s not an answer.
> 
> 
> 
> What is not an answer?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote the Law, not a post by another user.
Click to expand...

The TNHarley quote is what I was responding to.  As I'm sure you know estate law is regulated at the state level so it varies from state to state

* LAST WAGES DUE DECEASED EMPLOYEE *
Under certain circumstances, Tennessee law allows employers to pay to the surviving spouse or children (possible beneficiaries) of a deceased employee the last wages and other benefits due the deceased employee without a court order .  

*30-2-103. Designation of beneficiary -- Wages and debts owed deceased employee.  *
TN - Tennessee Code Annotated Tenn. Code Ann. § 30-2-103

Title 30 Administration of Estates > Chapter 2 Management, Settlement and Distribution > Part 1 Allowances to Family

(a) (1) An employee may designate a beneficiary to receive payment for any wages or salary due such employee at the time of the employee's death. (2) The employer is encouraged to inform the employee of this right at the time the employee is hired. (3) If the employee fails to designate such beneficiary as provided for in subdivision (a)(1), the employer shall pay out such wages and salary according to subsection (b). (b) (1) A sum not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) is authorized to be paid directly to the surviving spouse of a decedent, ...​In general 

*Final paycheck issued after death*
What do you do if an employee suddenly dies, and you still owe them wages? What you will do varies slightly depending on when you distribute the deceased employee wages.

In all cases, you will make the final payment to the employee’s beneficiary or estate. Have the beneficiary or estate representative complete Form W-9 so you have their information. It could take a while to receive the completed Form W-9 if the estate needs to obtain an employer identification number (EIN).

Once you receive the beneficiary’s or estate’s information, you will make the final paycheck out to the beneficiary or estate. You must report the gross amount on Form 1099-MISC in box 3. Use the information you received on Form W-9 to fill out IRS Form 1099-MISC.
What to Do With Deceased Employee Wages​


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

TNHarley said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if this is such a hard question
> Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Who create the harm?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People that died a long time ago.
Click to expand...

And how long was the harm that they created left in place to keep doing harm to additional generations of individuals?


----------



## TNHarley

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if this is such a hard question
> Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Who create the harm?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People that died a long time ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And how long was the harm that they created left in place to keep doing harm to additional generations of individuals?
Click to expand...

Slavery ended over 150 years ago.


----------



## dave p

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if this is such a hard question
> Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Who create the harm?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People that died a long time ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And how long was the harm that they created left in place to keep doing harm to additional generations of individuals?
Click to expand...

The harm was created by those that sold them as well as the ones who bought the. At this point none including those that were bought and sold exist. Therefore nothing is owed to anyone.


----------



## TNHarley

dave p said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if this is such a hard question
> Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Who create the harm?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People that died a long time ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And how long was the harm that they created left in place to keep doing harm to additional generations of individuals?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The harm was created by those that sold them as well as the ones who bought the. At this point none including those that were bought and sold exist. Therefore nothing is owed to anyone.
Click to expand...

Why arent the people that traded them for a bucket of oranges ever blasted?


----------



## dave p

TNHarley said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if this is such a hard question
> Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Who create the harm?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People that died a long time ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And how long was the harm that they created left in place to keep doing harm to additional generations of individuals?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The harm was created by those that sold them as well as the ones who bought the. At this point none including those that were bought and sold exist. Therefore nothing is owed to anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why arent the people that traded them for a bucket of oranges ever blasted?
Click to expand...

I've been asking that all morning! No one answers.


----------



## TNHarley

dave p said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who create the harm?
> 
> 
> 
> People that died a long time ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And how long was the harm that they created left in place to keep doing harm to additional generations of individuals?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The harm was created by those that sold them as well as the ones who bought the. At this point none including those that were bought and sold exist. Therefore nothing is owed to anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why arent the people that traded them for a bucket of oranges ever blasted?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've been asking that all morning! No one answers.
Click to expand...

Probably for the same reason blacks arent screaming at their distant relatives in Africa to free the 20M slaves on that continent currently. 
They arent white.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

TNHarley said:


> Slavery ended over 150 years ago.


Slavery was abolished by the 13th Amendment in 1865 yet for the next 99+ years until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act in 1965 and the Fair Housing Act in 1968 people of African descent were still legislatively regulated to second class citizenry under the separate but most definitely not equal doctrine.

You all do understand the concept of something being culmulative with the damages building upon previous damages all causing additional harm correct?

If as a black person I'm required to pay the same amount in taxes as you a white person, but all I'm receiving is 40% of the benefits & services being a tax paying member of society entails while whites are receiving 100% of the benefits and services, how is that equitable, particularly if it's written into law and has been adjudicated by our courts?  These are damages that are quantifiable so what's with the pretense?


----------



## TNHarley

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Slavery ended over 150 years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Slavery was abolished by the 13th Amendment in 1865 yet for the next 99+ years until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act in 1965 and the Fair Housing Act in 1968 people of African descent were still legislatively regulated to second class citizenry under the separate but most definitely not equal doctrine.
> 
> You all do understand the concept of something being culmulative with the damages building upon previous damages all causing additional harm correct?
> 
> If as a black person I'm required to pay the same amount in taxes as you a white person, but all I'm receiving is 40% of the benefits & services being a tax paying member of society entails while whites are receiving 100% of the benefits and services, how is that equitable, particularly if it's written into law and has been adjudicated by our courts?  These are damages that are quantifiable so what's with the pretense?
Click to expand...

Well, now, a quarter of the blacks dont pay any taxes and get more free shit than me.
Even?
So, back to the topic at hand. Slavery.
Who owes the descendents of slaves?


----------



## there4eyeM

1% of the population is getting 99% of the benefits. 
Everyone else is in the same boat with each other.


----------



## there4eyeM

Next, we can deal with what women are owed.


----------



## TNHarley

there4eyeM said:


> 1% of the population is getting 99% of the benefits.
> Everyone else is in the same boat with each other.


Like a welfare single mom with no job and paying no income taxes yet she is getting free food, shelter, gas money, daycare money, and a welfare check?
You sure?
Do you know what percentage of the middle class gets back more than they pay in? 
While i agree the rich have too much power in this country, there is no need to make up ridiculous stuff. There is plenty there to blast the rich about.


----------



## TNHarley

My main customer block is local municipalities.
I had a road supervisor in another state quit his job because his wife died. He quit because after her death, he was going to get back MORE in welfare because of their 5 kids.
As far as i know, he is STILL getting paid simply for existing.


----------



## dave p

there4eyeM said:


> Next, we can deal with what women are owed.


The only group that should have any Government consideration ( not reparations ) is the Native Americans. Not all Tribes that are still inexistence have been qualified. Their country was stolen from them and then there was systematic genocide.


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s not an answer.
> 
> 
> 
> What is not an answer?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote the Law, not a post by another user.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The TNHarley quote is what I was responding to.  As I'm sure you know estate law is regulated at the state level so it varies from state to state
> 
> * LAST WAGES DUE DECEASED EMPLOYEE *
> Under certain circumstances, Tennessee law allows employers to pay to the surviving spouse or children (possible beneficiaries) of a deceased employee the last wages and other benefits due the deceased employee without a court order .
> 
> *30-2-103. Designation of beneficiary -- Wages and debts owed deceased employee.  *
> TN - Tennessee Code Annotated Tenn. Code Ann. § 30-2-103
> 
> Title 30 Administration of Estates > Chapter 2 Management, Settlement and Distribution > Part 1 Allowances to Family
> 
> (a) (1) An employee may designate a beneficiary to receive payment for any wages or salary due such employee at the time of the employee's death. (2) The employer is encouraged to inform the employee of this right at the time the employee is hired. (3) If the employee fails to designate such beneficiary as provided for in subdivision (a)(1), the employer shall pay out such wages and salary according to subsection (b). (b) (1) A sum not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) is authorized to be paid directly to the surviving spouse of a decedent, ...​In general
> 
> *Final paycheck issued after death*
> What do you do if an employee suddenly dies, and you still owe them wages? What you will do varies slightly depending on when you distribute the deceased employee wages.
> 
> In all cases, you will make the final payment to the employee’s beneficiary or estate. Have the beneficiary or estate representative complete Form W-9 so you have their information. It could take a while to receive the completed Form W-9 if the estate needs to obtain an employer identification number (EIN).
> 
> Once you receive the beneficiary’s or estate’s information, you will make the final paycheck out to the beneficiary or estate. You must report the gross amount on Form 1099-MISC in box 3. Use the information you received on Form W-9 to fill out IRS Form 1099-MISC.
> What to Do With Deceased Employee Wages​
Click to expand...

Your post just blew your argument away.


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if this is such a hard question
> Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Who create the harm?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People that died a long time ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And how long was the harm that they created left in place to keep doing harm to additional generations of individuals?
Click to expand...

Jews came here after WWII, poor as dirt.
No excuse.


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> As if this is such a hard question
> Who owes the slaves descendents reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Who create the harm?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People that died a long time ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And how long was the harm that they created left in place to keep doing harm to additional generations of individuals?
Click to expand...

Which has zero relevance to the quote.


----------



## BuckToothMoron

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?



It’s a pointless exercise since there should not be nor will there ever be reparations paid to blacks.


----------



## BuckToothMoron

gallantwarrior said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And am asking about wages owed at the time of death of someone held as a slave in the US at the time of his/her death, plus interest.  Part of the question addresses how much interest.
Click to expand...


If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.


----------



## Hellbilly

DarkFury said:


> *NOT ONE DIME.*


I would be satisfied if you were deported. 

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## IM2

*Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation*
By *Douglas Main* 

n 1865, toward the end of the Civil War, Union Army General William Tecumseh Sherman promised slaves that they’d receive 40 acres and a mule. Land was even set aside, but the promise was recanted by President Andrew Johnson. Ever since, the issue of reparations has come up many times, often fiercely debated. Although most Americans generally don’t support reparations, according to University of Connecticut researcher  Thomas Craemer, it matters greatly how the question is worded, who would get reparations and in what form. For example, the idea of reparations paid in educational benefits are more popular than others, Craemer says.

On the other hand, one of the cases often made against reparations is that it'd be impractically difficult to calculate how to fairly take and give so many years after the fact. But in a new paper,  published in the journal _ Social Science Quarterly_, Craemer makes the case that there are other examples of historical reparations paid many decades later after “damages” were incurred. He also has come up with what he says is the most economically sound estimate to date of what reparations could cost: between $5.9 trillion and $14.2 trillion.

Craemer came up with those figures by tabulating how many hours all slaves—men, women and children—worked in the United States from when the country was officially established in 1776 until 1865, when slavery was officially abolished. He multiplied the amount of time they worked by average wage prices at the time, and then a compounding interest rate of 3 percent per year (more than making up for inflation). There is a range because the amount of time worked isn’t a hard figure.

Previous estimates of reparations have ranged from around $36 billion to $10 trillion (in 2009 dollars), Craemer says. Those calculations mostly looked at wealth created by slaves as opposed to services provided, resulting in underestimates. Craemer believes that “the economic assumptions underlying [his method] are more sound” than those used in previous papers.

Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation

_*And he's being nice about it since blacks were slaves from at least 1641 in the Amrcan colony.*_


----------



## IM2

BuckToothMoron said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And am asking about wages owed at the time of death of someone held as a slave in the US at the time of his/her death, plus interest.  Part of the question addresses how much interest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
Click to expand...


No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.


----------



## Meathead

IM2 said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And am asking about wages owed at the time of death of someone held as a slave in the US at the time of his/her death, plus interest.  Part of the question addresses how much interest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
Click to expand...

Stop begging.


----------



## Pete7469

IM2 said:


> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.



The absolute worst thing about slavery is that it brought malignant pieces of shit like you to our shores.

If I had my way your genetic garbage would have been cannibalized 400 years ago by whatever tribe sold them to the arab traders instead. 

Fertilizer will be your greatest accomplishment.


.


----------



## IM2

Meathead said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And am asking about wages owed at the time of death of someone held as a slave in the US at the time of his/her death, plus interest.  Part of the question addresses how much interest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop begging.
Click to expand...


Whites have begged now for 242 years.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> *Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation*
> By *Douglas Main*
> 
> n 1865, toward the end of the Civil War, Union Army General William Tecumseh Sherman promised slaves that they’d receive 40 acres and a mule. Land was even set aside, but the promise was recanted by President Andrew Johnson. Ever since, the issue of reparations has come up many times, often fiercely debated. Although most Americans generally don’t support reparations, according to University of Connecticut researcher  Thomas Craemer, it matters greatly how the question is worded, who would get reparations and in what form. For example, the idea of reparations paid in educational benefits are more popular than others, Craemer says.
> 
> On the other hand, one of the cases often made against reparations is that it'd be impractically difficult to calculate how to fairly take and give so many years after the fact. But in a new paper,  published in the journal _ Social Science Quarterly_, Craemer makes the case that there are other examples of historical reparations paid many decades later after “damages” were incurred. He also has come up with what he says is the most economically sound estimate to date of what reparations could cost: between $5.9 trillion and $14.2 trillion.
> 
> Craemer came up with those figures by tabulating how many hours all slaves—men, women and children—worked in the United States from when the country was officially established in 1776 until 1865, when slavery was officially abolished. He multiplied the amount of time they worked by average wage prices at the time, and then a compounding interest rate of 3 percent per year (more than making up for inflation). There is a range because the amount of time worked isn’t a hard figure.
> 
> Previous estimates of reparations have ranged from around $36 billion to $10 trillion (in 2009 dollars), Craemer says. Those calculations mostly looked at wealth created by slaves as opposed to services provided, resulting in underestimates. Craemer believes that “the economic assumptions underlying [his method] are more sound” than those used in previous papers.
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> _*And he's being nice about it since blacks were slaves from at least 1641 in the Amrcan colony.*_


Doesn't mean they are deserved. They are not.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
> 
> 
> 
> And am asking about wages owed at the time of death of someone held as a slave in the US at the time of his/her death, plus interest.  Part of the question addresses how much interest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop begging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whites have begged now for 242 years.
Click to expand...

Begged for what?


----------



## IM2

Pete7469 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The absolute worst thing about slavery is that it brought malignant pieces of shit like you to our shores.
> 
> If I had my way your genetic garbage would have been cannibalized 400 years ago by whatever tribe sold them to the arab traders instead.
> 
> Fertilizer will be your greatest accomplishment.
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...


Your post shows why I have accomplished way more than you ever will in life.


----------



## Montrovant

Pete7469 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The absolute worst thing about slavery is that it brought malignant pieces of shit like you to our shores.
> 
> If I had my way your genetic garbage would have been cannibalized 400 years ago by whatever tribe sold them to the arab traders instead.
> 
> Fertilizer will be your greatest accomplishment.
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...


*That* is "the absolute worst thing about slavery"?


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation*
> By *Douglas Main*
> 
> n 1865, toward the end of the Civil War, Union Army General William Tecumseh Sherman promised slaves that they’d receive 40 acres and a mule. Land was even set aside, but the promise was recanted by President Andrew Johnson. Ever since, the issue of reparations has come up many times, often fiercely debated. Although most Americans generally don’t support reparations, according to University of Connecticut researcher  Thomas Craemer, it matters greatly how the question is worded, who would get reparations and in what form. For example, the idea of reparations paid in educational benefits are more popular than others, Craemer says.
> 
> On the other hand, one of the cases often made against reparations is that it'd be impractically difficult to calculate how to fairly take and give so many years after the fact. But in a new paper,  published in the journal _ Social Science Quarterly_, Craemer makes the case that there are other examples of historical reparations paid many decades later after “damages” were incurred. He also has come up with what he says is the most economically sound estimate to date of what reparations could cost: between $5.9 trillion and $14.2 trillion.
> 
> Craemer came up with those figures by tabulating how many hours all slaves—men, women and children—worked in the United States from when the country was officially established in 1776 until 1865, when slavery was officially abolished. He multiplied the amount of time they worked by average wage prices at the time, and then a compounding interest rate of 3 percent per year (more than making up for inflation). There is a range because the amount of time worked isn’t a hard figure.
> 
> Previous estimates of reparations have ranged from around $36 billion to $10 trillion (in 2009 dollars), Craemer says. Those calculations mostly looked at wealth created by slaves as opposed to services provided, resulting in underestimates. Craemer believes that “the economic assumptions underlying [his method] are more sound” than those used in previous papers.
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> _*And he's being nice about it since blacks were slaves from at least 1641 in the Amrcan colony.*_
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't mean they are deserved. They are not.
Click to expand...


Actually it does mean they are deserved.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And am asking about wages owed at the time of death of someone held as a slave in the US at the time of his/her death, plus interest.  Part of the question addresses how much interest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop begging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whites have begged now for 242 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Begged for what?
Click to expand...


Everything you have today.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation*
> By *Douglas Main*
> 
> n 1865, toward the end of the Civil War, Union Army General William Tecumseh Sherman promised slaves that they’d receive 40 acres and a mule. Land was even set aside, but the promise was recanted by President Andrew Johnson. Ever since, the issue of reparations has come up many times, often fiercely debated. Although most Americans generally don’t support reparations, according to University of Connecticut researcher  Thomas Craemer, it matters greatly how the question is worded, who would get reparations and in what form. For example, the idea of reparations paid in educational benefits are more popular than others, Craemer says.
> 
> On the other hand, one of the cases often made against reparations is that it'd be impractically difficult to calculate how to fairly take and give so many years after the fact. But in a new paper,  published in the journal _ Social Science Quarterly_, Craemer makes the case that there are other examples of historical reparations paid many decades later after “damages” were incurred. He also has come up with what he says is the most economically sound estimate to date of what reparations could cost: between $5.9 trillion and $14.2 trillion.
> 
> Craemer came up with those figures by tabulating how many hours all slaves—men, women and children—worked in the United States from when the country was officially established in 1776 until 1865, when slavery was officially abolished. He multiplied the amount of time they worked by average wage prices at the time, and then a compounding interest rate of 3 percent per year (more than making up for inflation). There is a range because the amount of time worked isn’t a hard figure.
> 
> Previous estimates of reparations have ranged from around $36 billion to $10 trillion (in 2009 dollars), Craemer says. Those calculations mostly looked at wealth created by slaves as opposed to services provided, resulting in underestimates. Craemer believes that “the economic assumptions underlying [his method] are more sound” than those used in previous papers.
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> _*And he's being nice about it since blacks were slaves from at least 1641 in the Amrcan colony.*_
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't mean they are deserved. They are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually it does mean they are deserved.
Click to expand...

It actually means he ran numbers and came up with a calculation. It doesn't mean that they indeed should be paid, will be paid or that they are deserved. They are not deserved.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop begging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whites have begged now for 242 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Begged for what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything you have today.
Click to expand...

I haven't begged for anything neither did my parents or their parents.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop begging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whites have begged now for 242 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Begged for what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything you have today.
Click to expand...


Wait, whites begged for everything they have?  I thought they took it through force and subjugation.  There's a disconnect in your argument here.


----------



## dave p

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> 
> 
> Stop begging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whites have begged now for 242 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Begged for what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything you have today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wait, whites begged for everything they have?  I thought they took it through force and subjugation.  There's a disconnect in your argument here.
Click to expand...

All of his arguments are disconnected.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

Asclepias said:


> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations



_And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._

Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?

Holy double-counting Batman!!!


----------



## Indeependent

Don’t steal their dreams.


----------



## DarkFury

*Andrew Johnson, the FIRST democrat to lie to you. Started the poll tax and Jim Crowe.
You can collect from the DNC as I don't owe you a dime.*


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop begging.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whites have begged now for 242 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Begged for what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything you have today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wait, whites begged for everything they have?  I thought they took it through force and subjugation.  There's a disconnect in your argument here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
Click to expand...


You can do both montrovant, there is no disconnect.

Example: whites begged the courts because they feared blacks would take jobs from them after they were freed from slavery so we get the so called civil rights cases of the 1880's and Plessy. At the same time various white racist groups killed, beat, rioted burned down communities and intimidated blacks. The laws passed excluded blacks and gave whites things non whites could not get. I know this is a difficult concept for you to understand therefore you chose to not believe and question. Instead of that, go study.


----------



## IM2

DarkFury said:


> *Andrew Johnson, the FIRST democrat to lie to you. Started the poll tax and Jim Crowe.
> You can collect from the DNC as I don't owe you a dime.*



The lie is bi partisan.

_“The lily-white movement was an all-white faction of the __Republican Party__ in the Southern United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It battled and usually defeated the biracial element called the __Black-and-tan faction__._

_During __Reconstruction__, following the __U.S. Civil War__, black leaders in Texas and around the country gained increasing influence in the Republican Party by organizing blacks as an important voting bloc. Conservative whites attempted to eliminate this influence and recover white voters who had defected to the __Democratic Party__. The effort was largely successful in eliminating African-American influence in the Republican Party leading to black voters predominantly migrating to the Democratic Party for much of the 20th century._

_The term lily-white movement was coined by __Texas Republican__ leader __Norris Wright Cuney__, who used the term in an 1888 Republican convention to describe efforts by white conservatives to oust blacks from positions of Texas party leadership and incite riots to divide the party.__[1]__ The term came to be used nationally to describe this ongoing movement as it further developed in the early 20th century,__[2]__ including through the administration of __Herbert Hoover__. Localized movements began immediately after the war but by the beginning of the 20th century the effort had become national.”_

_ “This movement is largely credited with driving blacks out of the Republican party during the early 20th century, setting the stage for their eventual support of the Democrats.”_

*Michael K. Fauntroy - **Republicans and the Black vote*​


----------



## IM2

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
Click to expand...


Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.


----------



## DarkFury

IM2 said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Andrew Johnson, the FIRST democrat to lie to you. Started the poll tax and Jim Crowe.
> You can collect from the DNC as I don't owe you a dime.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The lie is bi partisan.
> 
> _“The lily-white movement was an all-white faction of the __Republican Party__ in the Southern United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It battled and usually defeated the biracial element called the __Black-and-tan faction__._
> 
> _During __Reconstruction__, following the __U.S. Civil War__, black leaders in Texas and around the country gained increasing influence in the Republican Party by organizing blacks as an important voting bloc. Conservative whites attempted to eliminate this influence and recover white voters who had defected to the __Democratic Party__. The effort was largely successful in eliminating African-American influence in the Republican Party leading to black voters predominantly migrating to the Democratic Party for much of the 20th century._
> 
> _The term lily-white movement was coined by __Texas Republican__ leader __Norris Wright Cuney__, who used the term in an 1888 Republican convention to describe efforts by white conservatives to oust blacks from positions of Texas party leadership and incite riots to divide the party.__[1]__ The term came to be used nationally to describe this ongoing movement as it further developed in the early 20th century,__[2]__ including through the administration of __Herbert Hoover__. Localized movements began immediately after the war but by the beginning of the 20th century the effort had become national.”_
> 
> _ “This movement is largely credited with driving blacks out of the Republican party during the early 20th century, setting the stage for their eventual support of the Democrats.”_
> 
> *Michael K. Fauntroy - **Republicans and the Black vote*​
Click to expand...

*Andrew Johnson HAD your mule and your 40 and TOOK it away. if YOU hurry you MIGHT   still be able to get YOUR Mule! He sold YOUR 40, and shit like that happens in the DNC Mule party.*


----------



## DarkFury

IM2 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
Click to expand...

*They were IMMIGRANTs on 17th century welfare.*


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
Click to expand...

Go to the countries in Africa that sold the slaves in the first place. If you are so intent on someone paying ( I don't believe anyone should ) , they are the most responsible. The U.S. shouldn't give a dime


----------



## Pete7469

Montrovant said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The absolute worst thing about slavery is that it brought malignant pieces of shit like you to our shores.
> 
> If I had my way your genetic garbage would have been cannibalized 400 years ago by whatever tribe sold them to the arab traders instead.
> 
> Fertilizer will be your greatest accomplishment.
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *That* is "the absolute worst thing about slavery"?
Click to expand...



I reckon I could have worded it different.

The worst consequence of slavery is that it resulted in that piece of shit not being cannibalized generations ago. As a result, the option to sell assholes like him to arab and portugese merchants in exchange for rum allows a piece of shit like him to steal our oxygen.

Otherwise his nitrogen would be used by some vegetation right now.

The worst thing about slavery is that it is still practiced all over the world, but our bed wetting leftist oxygen thieves like to pretend it only happened here, and we didn't fight a war to end it.


.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Go to the countries in Africa that sold the slaves in the first place. If you are so intent on someone paying ( I don't believe anyone should ) , they are the most responsible. The U.S. shouldn't give a dime
Click to expand...


Nope. The case is to be taken to the US government.

Or The Hague.


----------



## IM2

Pete7469 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The absolute worst thing about slavery is that it brought malignant pieces of shit like you to our shores.
> 
> If I had my way your genetic garbage would have been cannibalized 400 years ago by whatever tribe sold them to the arab traders instead.
> 
> Fertilizer will be your greatest accomplishment.
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *That* is "the absolute worst thing about slavery"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I reckon I could have worded it different.
> 
> The worst consequence of slavery is that it resulted in that piece of shit not being cannibalized generations ago. As a result, the option to sell assholes like him to arab and portugese merchants in exchange for rum allows a piece of shit like him to steal our oxygen.
> 
> Otherwise his nitrogen would be used by some vegetation right now.
> 
> The worst thing about slavery is that it is still practiced all over the world, but our bed wetting leftist oxygen thieves like to pretend it only happened here, and we didn't fight a war to end it.
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...


Excuses.


----------



## IM2

DarkFury said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Andrew Johnson, the FIRST democrat to lie to you. Started the poll tax and Jim Crowe.
> You can collect from the DNC as I don't owe you a dime.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The lie is bi partisan.
> 
> _“The lily-white movement was an all-white faction of the __Republican Party__ in the Southern United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It battled and usually defeated the biracial element called the __Black-and-tan faction__._
> 
> _During __Reconstruction__, following the __U.S. Civil War__, black leaders in Texas and around the country gained increasing influence in the Republican Party by organizing blacks as an important voting bloc. Conservative whites attempted to eliminate this influence and recover white voters who had defected to the __Democratic Party__. The effort was largely successful in eliminating African-American influence in the Republican Party leading to black voters predominantly migrating to the Democratic Party for much of the 20th century._
> 
> _The term lily-white movement was coined by __Texas Republican__ leader __Norris Wright Cuney__, who used the term in an 1888 Republican convention to describe efforts by white conservatives to oust blacks from positions of Texas party leadership and incite riots to divide the party.__[1]__ The term came to be used nationally to describe this ongoing movement as it further developed in the early 20th century,__[2]__ including through the administration of __Herbert Hoover__. Localized movements began immediately after the war but by the beginning of the 20th century the effort had become national.”_
> 
> _ “This movement is largely credited with driving blacks out of the Republican party during the early 20th century, setting the stage for their eventual support of the Democrats.”_
> 
> *Michael K. Fauntroy - **Republicans and the Black vote*​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Andrew Johnson HAD your mule and your 40 and TOOK it away. if YOU hurry you MIGHT   still be able to get YOUR Mule! He sold YOUR 40, and shit like that happens in the DNC Mule party.*
Click to expand...


Excuses.


----------



## IM2

DarkFury said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They were IMMIGRANTs on 17th century welfare.*
Click to expand...


Excuses.


----------



## DarkFury

IM2 said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They were IMMIGRANTs on 17th century welfare.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Excuses.
Click to expand...

*Look you dumb fuck Johnson had the vets from the war killed, shot down in the streets in front of the capitial.
HE did it so he would not have to pay them. Where is their money you fuckin racist? How about what they EARNED? Democrats DO NOT PAY THEIR BILLS, not to blacks, whites, native Americans or Asians.
THEY DON'T PAY THEIR FUCKIN BILLS!*


----------



## IM2

DarkFury said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They were IMMIGRANTs on 17th century welfare.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Excuses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Look you dumb fuck Johnson had the vets from the war killed, shot down in the streets in front of the capitial.
> HE did it so he would not have to pay them. Where is their money you fuckin racist? How about what they EARNED? Democrats DO NOT PAY THEIR BILLS, not to blacks, whites, native Americans or Asians.
> THEY DON'T PAY THEIR FUCKIN BILLS!*
Click to expand...


Excuses. That was in the1800s. Your party is so fucked up by its current racsim that you keep trying to cite events from the 1800's to try fooling people about what your party stands for today.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

IM2 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
Click to expand...


*Considering he was counting what happened after slavery *

Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Indeependent said:


> Jews came here after WWII, poor as dirt.
> No excuse.


The Jewish people for the most part are not of "African descent".  In other words, they're not black therefore they are not a part of the designated class whose rights were legislated away.


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews came here after WWII, poor as dirt.
> No excuse.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people for the most part are not of "African descent".  In other words, they're not black therefore they are not a part of the designated class whose rights were legislated away.
Click to expand...

Tell that to Hitler and Stalin.
Jews value education above welfare.


----------



## dave p

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews came here after WWII, poor as dirt.
> No excuse.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people for the most part are not of "African descent".  In other words, they're not black therefore they are not a part of the designated class whose rights were legislated away.
Click to expand...

Doesn’t matter. Many races have come to the U.S. and have succeeded without help. They weren’t thought of or considered in the constitution. Your argument is hallow.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *They were IMMIGRANTs on 17th century welfare.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Excuses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Look you dumb fuck Johnson had the vets from the war killed, shot down in the streets in front of the capitial.
> HE did it so he would not have to pay them. Where is their money you fuckin racist? How about what they EARNED? Democrats DO NOT PAY THEIR BILLS, not to blacks, whites, native Americans or Asians.
> THEY DON'T PAY THEIR FUCKIN BILLS!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Excuses. That was in the1800s. Your party is so fucked up by its current racsim that you keep trying to cite events from the 1800's to try fooling people about what your party stands for today.
Click to expand...

You make money and give to your local Small Business Authority and the Republicans will love you.
Their favorite color is green; just like the Democrats favorite color.


----------



## MizMolly

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
Click to expand...

Shouldnt be much, would be for wage scale back then, i disagree with reparations, wages were not owed at time of their death


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Indeependent said:


> Your post just blew your argument away.


You seem to be really confused about what was being discussed. 

I don't know why you're attempting to compare the cessation of reparation benefits upon death of a holocaust surviver with the erroneous concept that the death of an employee terminates all finanical obligations to said worker by his employer.  My comment that just because someone is deceased that their earned wages and/or other benefits are no longer owed was an aside and not the basis for an argument for reparations.  In fact I haven't actually made an argument for reparations yet.


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your post just blew your argument away.
> 
> 
> 
> You seem to be really confused about what was being discussed.
> 
> I don't know why you're attempting to compare the cessation of reparation benefits upon death of a holocaust surviver with the erroneous concept that the death of an employee terminates all finanical obligations to said worker by his employer.  My comment that just because someone is deceased that their earned wages and/or other benefits are no longer owed was an aside and not the basis for an argument for reparations.  In fact I haven't actually made an argument for reparations yet.
Click to expand...

I'm not confused...
Read your post.
Read my post.
Read your post.
You didn't even read what you posted.
Read it like an attorney would read it and you'll see it blows your first post into the dust bin.


----------



## TNHarley

The facts are:
Some racist assholes traded with some assholes from africa, and got humans.
This was practiced all over the world. If we didnt get them, someone else was going to.
At the same time this was going on, americans were enslaved as well. 
That part of the world STILL has around 20m slaves.
Several hundred thousand people died over slavery.
This was over 150 years ago. No one alive suffered from slavery, nor had slaves.
Blacks also owned blacks.
Sure, our govt still fucked with blacks after that. Thats what govts do!
Most blacks vote democrat. They love big govt. In fact, some are willing to hurt others over it.
Govts in africa fuck with people too. 
A small centralized govt is PROGRESSIVE
So do you REALLY hate being controlled?!?
In the end, you need to grow the fuck up. No one owes blacks anything. 
At this point, you are causing your own problems.
The end.


----------



## Indeependent

TNHarley said:


> The facts are:
> Some racist assholes traded with some assholes from africa, and got humans.
> This was practiced all over the world. If we didnt get them, someone else was going to.
> At the same time this was going on, americans were enslaved as well.
> That part of the world STILL has around 20m slaves.
> Several hundred thousand people died over slavery.
> This was over 150 years ago. No one alive suffered from slavery, nor had slaves.
> Blacks also owned blacks.
> Sure, our govt still fucked with blacks after that. Thats what govts do!
> Most blacks vote democrat. They love big govt. In fact, some are willing to hurt others over it.
> Govts in africa fuck with people too.
> A small centralized govt is PROGRESSIVE
> So do you REALLY hate being controlled?!?
> In the end, you need to grow the fuck up. No one owes blacks anything.
> At this point, you are causing your own problems.
> The end.


You get 10 stars **********


----------



## dave p

Indeependent said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The facts are:
> Some racist assholes traded with some assholes from africa, and got humans.
> This was practiced all over the world. If we didnt get them, someone else was going to.
> At the same time this was going on, americans were enslaved as well.
> That part of the world STILL has around 20m slaves.
> Several hundred thousand people died over slavery.
> This was over 150 years ago. No one alive suffered from slavery, nor had slaves.
> Blacks also owned blacks.
> Sure, our govt still fucked with blacks after that. Thats what govts do!
> Most blacks vote democrat. They love big govt. In fact, some are willing to hurt others over it.
> Govts in africa fuck with people too.
> A small centralized govt is PROGRESSIVE
> So do you REALLY hate being controlled?!?
> In the end, you need to grow the fuck up. No one owes blacks anything.
> At this point, you are causing your own problems.
> The end.
> 
> 
> 
> You get 10 stars **********
Click to expand...

There aren’t enough accolades. These whiners are ridiculous


----------



## BuckToothMoron

IM2 said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And am asking about wages owed at the time of death of someone held as a slave in the US at the time of his/her death, plus interest.  Part of the question addresses how much interest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
Click to expand...


Sure why not. Good luck, lol.


----------



## BuckToothMoron

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop begging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whites have begged now for 242 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Begged for what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything you have today.
Click to expand...


I haven’t begged for anything. I have paid for all that I have. Never got a government check.


----------



## dave p

BuckToothMoron said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And am asking about wages owed at the time of death of someone held as a slave in the US at the time of his/her death, plus interest.  Part of the question addresses how much interest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure why not. Good luck, lol.
Click to expand...

Morons with no clue. Leaches in society.


----------



## Indeependent

BuckToothMoron said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> 
> 
> Stop begging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whites have begged now for 242 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Begged for what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything you have today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I haven’t begged for anything. I have paid for all that I have. Never got a government check.
Click to expand...

STFU Honky!


----------



## dave p

Indeependent said:


> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop begging.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whites have begged now for 242 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Begged for what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything you have today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I haven’t begged for anything. I have paid for all that I have. Never got a government check.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> STFU Honky!
Click to expand...

No, I don’t bellieve I will


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Indeependent said:


> I'm not confused...
> Read your post.
> Read my post.
> Read your post.
> You didn't even read what you posted.
> Read it like an attorney would read it and you'll see it blows your first post into the dust bin.


I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that perhaps you hadn't read the entire thread but if you have then I revert back to my original comment regarding your apparent confusion.

Why do you think reparations and wages owed are the same thing, aside from all of the state and federal regulations of workers rights?  Wages are earned by working or "laboring" and reparations are payments from a government for a wrong or injustice done to the recipient.  They are not the same thing however centuries of wage theft due to discriminatory and racist governmental policies can be the basis for a reparation claim.


----------



## Indeependent

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not confused...
> Read your post.
> Read my post.
> Read your post.
> You didn't even read what you posted.
> Read it like an attorney would read it and you'll see it blows your first post into the dust bin.
> 
> 
> 
> I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that perhaps you hadn't read the entire thread but if you have then I revert back to my original comment regarding your apparent confusion.
> 
> Why do you think reparations and wages owed are the same thing, aside from all of the state and federal regulations of workers rights?  Wages are earned by working or "laboring" and reparations are payments from a government for a wrong or injustice done to the recipient.  They are not the same thing however centuries of wage theft due to discriminatory and racist governmental policies can be the basis for a reparation claim.
Click to expand...

It's obvious Liberals never read what they post and then attempt to divert to how stupid the opposing stance is.
Thankfully the post is there for all to read.


----------



## dave p

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not confused...
> Read your post.
> Read my post.
> Read your post.
> You didn't even read what you posted.
> Read it like an attorney would read it and you'll see it blows your first post into the dust bin.
> 
> 
> 
> I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that perhaps you hadn't read the entire thread but if you have then I revert back to my original comment regarding your apparent confusion.
> 
> Why do you think reparations and wages owed are the same thing, aside from all of the state and federal regulations of workers rights?  Wages are earned by working or "laboring" and reparations are payments from a government for a wrong or injustice done to the recipient.  They are not the same thing however centuries of wage theft due to discriminatory and racist governmental policies can be the basis for a reparation claim.
Click to expand...

Quit being a victim. No reparations are due from this country. Period. If you want extortion go to the African countries that sold the people for a couple bucks in the first place. Other than that shut up, man up and contribute to society like every other race.


----------



## dave p

Indeependent said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not confused...
> Read your post.
> Read my post.
> Read your post.
> You didn't even read what you posted.
> Read it like an attorney would read it and you'll see it blows your first post into the dust bin.
> 
> 
> 
> I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that perhaps you hadn't read the entire thread but if you have then I revert back to my original comment regarding your apparent confusion.
> 
> Why do you think reparations and wages owed are the same thing, aside from all of the state and federal regulations of workers rights?  Wages are earned by working or "laboring" and reparations are payments from a government for a wrong or injustice done to the recipient.  They are not the same thing however centuries of wage theft due to discriminatory and racist governmental policies can be the basis for a reparation claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's obvious Liberals never read what they post and then attempt to divert to how stupid the opposing stance is.
> Thankfully the post is there for all to read.
Click to expand...

Liberals read?


----------



## Rambunctious

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> I have a cousin who was born in 1888 and passed away in 1987. The adults in her life, including her own parents were born into a time when black people were still being held as slaves. I met her before she passed away so even though I've never met anyone who was actually a slave, I have met with individuals who had family members who were held in slavery therefore for me this does not seem like "ancient" history.
> 
> My cousin along with one of her daughters wrote a book entitled "Lemon Swamp and Other Places". The following was written about the author (Mamie Garvin Fields) and the photograph following the text is the plantation from which my famility descended which is mentioned in the book.


Your cousin may have a genuine complaint her parents definitely had one but they are all dead...anyone alive today does not qualify for reparations from slavery in my opinion...
Where would it stop? every man and women alive can search for and find reasons for reparations of one grievance...misdeed or another...
We would all be better served to look forward not behind....


----------



## Indeependent

dave p said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not confused...
> Read your post.
> Read my post.
> Read your post.
> You didn't even read what you posted.
> Read it like an attorney would read it and you'll see it blows your first post into the dust bin.
> 
> 
> 
> I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that perhaps you hadn't read the entire thread but if you have then I revert back to my original comment regarding your apparent confusion.
> 
> Why do you think reparations and wages owed are the same thing, aside from all of the state and federal regulations of workers rights?  Wages are earned by working or "laboring" and reparations are payments from a government for a wrong or injustice done to the recipient.  They are not the same thing however centuries of wage theft due to discriminatory and racist governmental policies can be the basis for a reparation claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's obvious Liberals never read what they post and then attempt to divert to how stupid the opposing stance is.
> Thankfully the post is there for all to read.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Liberals read?
Click to expand...

Headlines...


----------



## dave p

Indeependent said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not confused...
> Read your post.
> Read my post.
> Read your post.
> You didn't even read what you posted.
> Read it like an attorney would read it and you'll see it blows your first post into the dust bin.
> 
> 
> 
> I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that perhaps you hadn't read the entire thread but if you have then I revert back to my original comment regarding your apparent confusion.
> 
> Why do you think reparations and wages owed are the same thing, aside from all of the state and federal regulations of workers rights?  Wages are earned by working or "laboring" and reparations are payments from a government for a wrong or injustice done to the recipient.  They are not the same thing however centuries of wage theft due to discriminatory and racist governmental policies can be the basis for a reparation claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's obvious Liberals never read what they post and then attempt to divert to how stupid the opposing stance is.
> Thankfully the post is there for all to read.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Liberals read?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Headlines...
Click to expand...

They may read them but they don’t comprehend them. A liberal is simply one educated beyond their capacity


----------



## Ridgerunner

dave p said:


> All of his arguments are disconnected.



He is disconnected, dave p...


----------



## dave p

Ridgerunner said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
Click to expand...

He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!


----------



## IM2

Toddsterpatriot said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Considering he was counting what happened after slavery *
> 
> Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.
Click to expand...


Well he did it. If you have a problem with it, you have his name. Man up, go to him and bitch.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews came here after WWII, poor as dirt.
> No excuse.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people for the most part are not of "African descent".  In other words, they're not black therefore they are not a part of the designated class whose rights were legislated away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell that to Hitler and Stalin.
> Jews value education above welfare.
Click to expand...


Jews are not a race. You do understand that the case that ended segregation was fought by blacks over education don't you? When will whites like you stop lying to yourself?


----------



## IM2

Ridgerunner said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
Click to expand...


Na. Not even close.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

IM2 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Considering he was counting what happened after slavery *
> 
> Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well he did it. If you have a problem with it, you have his name. Man up, go to him and bitch.
Click to expand...


Why would I have a problem with his terrible math?
He's never going to see a dollar of reparations either.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
Click to expand...


The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TNHarley said:


> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD


But their generational wealth has value to their descendants.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Na. Not even close.
Click to expand...

It’s fun to watch a neophyte racist try to make a name for himself go down in flames on a daily basis.


----------



## IM2

Toddsterpatriot said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Considering he was counting what happened after slavery *
> 
> Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well he did it. If you have a problem with it, you have his name. Man up, go to him and bitch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I have a problem with his terrible math?
> He's never going to see a dollar of reparations either.
Click to expand...


His math is fine.  And like I said, you can talk all your white boy bolo bullshit about what you're not going to pay, but the day will come that you will pay. No you won't pay reparations but when that payment is due, you will wish you had. Pray that you are not alive when that day comes.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
Click to expand...

Not afraid.a nobody like you scares no one,I took you off ignore because the comedies on network television can’t match your comedy ignorance. Not to mention your hatred abject racism or silliness. I. It’s al, that please keep it up because you are truly hilarious.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Na. Not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It’s fun to watch a neophyte racist try to make a name for himself go down in flames on a daily basis.
Click to expand...


It is fun to watch you go down in flames like the coward you are.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
Click to expand...

Debating you is so simple. You are so easy to combate because your ideals are simplistic and comprised of ignorance. Please bring it on jr. I could send in my 12 year old part time to debunk your racist, juvinile, ignorant misinformed narrrative. In the meantime my wife and I will be enjoying a very nice meal at I’ll Gabiano in Miami laughing at you petulant tirades.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Na. Not even close.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It’s fun to watch a neophyte racist try to make a name for himself go down in flames on a daily basis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is fun to watch you go down in flames like the coward you are.
Click to expand...

I’m flying high,you however have gone sub terainiane with your ignorant ideology.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not afraid.a nobody like you scares no one,I took you off ignore because the comedies on network television can’t match your comedy ignorance. Not to mention your hatred abject racism or silliness. I. It’s al, that please keep it up because you are truly hilarious.
Click to expand...


Dave, you're another empty bowl. So prove my racism, not by your standards, but by the true definition of racist.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Considering he was counting what happened after slavery *
> 
> Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well he did it. If you have a problem with it, you have his name. Man up, go to him and bitch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I have a problem with his terrible math?
> He's never going to see a dollar of reparations either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His math is fine.  And like I said, you can talk all your white boy bolo bullshit about what you're not going to pay, but the day will come that you will pay. No you won't pay reparations but when that payment is due, you will wish you had. Pray that you are not alive when that day comes.
Click to expand...

White boy. Who’s the racist. No one will pay because it isn’t deserved. Period


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Debating you is so simple. You are so easy to combate because your ideals are simplistic and comprised of ignorance. Please bring it on jr. I could send in my 12 year old part time to debunk your racist, juvinile, ignorant misinformed narrrative. In the meantime my wife and I will be enjoying a very nice meal at I’ll Gabiano in Miami laughing at you petulant tirades.
Click to expand...


No Dave. you can't fuck with me. I'm not  the one misinformed.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not afraid.a nobody like you scares no one,I took you off ignore because the comedies on network television can’t match your comedy ignorance. Not to mention your hatred abject racism or silliness. I. It’s al, that please keep it up because you are truly hilarious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dave, you're another empty bowl. So prove my racism, not by your standards, but by the true definition of racist.
Click to expand...

I have on several occasions as have you with your multiple posts. Own up to the racist,race baiting myopic tool you are. It’s ok no one will judge you. The first step to recovery is admiting you have a problem.


----------



## Coyote

I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Debating you is so simple. You are so easy to combate because your ideals are simplistic and comprised of ignorance. Please bring it on jr. I could send in my 12 year old part time to debunk your racist, juvinile, ignorant misinformed narrrative. In the meantime my wife and I will be enjoying a very nice meal at I’ll Gabiano in Miami laughing at you petulant tirades.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No Dave. you can't fuck with me. I'm not  the one misinformed.
Click to expand...

I don’t want to fuck you. You aren’t my type. You are however highly misinformed, prejudice, racist and off the charts stupid.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Considering he was counting what happened after slavery *
> 
> Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well he did it. If you have a problem with it, you have his name. Man up, go to him and bitch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I have a problem with his terrible math?
> He's never going to see a dollar of reparations either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His math is fine.  And like I said, you can talk all your white boy bolo bullshit about what you're not going to pay, but the day will come that you will pay. No you won't pay reparations but when that payment is due, you will wish you had. Pray that you are not alive when that day comes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> White boy. Who’s the racist. No one will pay because it isn’t deserved. Period
Click to expand...


White boy is not racist. Try again. You will pay but it will be the hard way. As for reparations, they are deserved. Whites like you do not get to make that determination. Period.


----------



## Coyote

*Folks...we are in Zone 2...that means you need to discuss the topic not each other.*


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Coyote said:


> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.


But it would be the US government paying the reparations.


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Considering he was counting what happened after slavery *
> 
> Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well he did it. If you have a problem with it, you have his name. Man up, go to him and bitch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I have a problem with his terrible math?
> He's never going to see a dollar of reparations either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His math is fine.  And like I said, you can talk all your white boy bolo bullshit about what you're not going to pay, but the day will come that you will pay. No you won't pay reparations but when that payment is due, you will wish you had. Pray that you are not alive when that day comes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> White boy. Who’s the racist. No one will pay because it isn’t deserved. Period
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> White boy is not racist. Try again. You will pay but it will be the hard way. As for reparations, they are deserved. Whites like you do not get to make that determination. Period.
Click to expand...

Yes we do.


----------



## Coyote

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.
> 
> 
> 
> But it would be the US government paying the reparations.
Click to expand...

Where does their money come from?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Coyote said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.
> 
> 
> 
> But it would be the US government paying the reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where does their money come from?
Click to expand...

Blacks, white, yellows, reds, tariffs, duties on foreign goods, corporations......where do you think it comes from?


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.



This argument ignores the continued suffering we face because of what ancestors did, what parents did, and what these generations are doing. The crimes did not  stop coyote, that's the major fallacy many whites base their arguments on. Your comparison is not even close. C'mon man, Donald Trump and others still exist today and they practiced racism and still do yet you argue like it all just stopped. You read the posts from people in this section. They own businesses, manage business, they are police officers, bankers, real estate agents, teachers and work in all fields yet you believe these things ended and these guys are not responsible for the continuing suffering we as blacks endure.


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.
> 
> 
> 
> But it would be the US government paying the reparations.
Click to expand...

 Nope


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.
> 
> 
> 
> But it would be the US government paying the reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where does their money come from?
Click to expand...


The same places the annual payments to Native American Tribes come from. Money paid because of what your ancestors did.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

dave p said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.
> 
> 
> 
> But it would be the US government paying the reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope
Click to expand...

Huh? Of course it would be, should the reparations be implememted.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.
> 
> 
> 
> But it would be the US government paying the reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope
Click to expand...


Actually if the case was presented and the decision was made that the government is paying yes it would.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> 
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Debating you is so simple. You are so easy to combate because your ideals are simplistic and comprised of ignorance. Please bring it on jr. I could send in my 12 year old part time to debunk your racist, juvinile, ignorant misinformed narrrative. In the meantime my wife and I will be enjoying a very nice meal at I’ll Gabiano in Miami laughing at you petulant tirades.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No Dave. you can't fuck with me. I'm not  the one misinformed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t want to fuck you. You aren’t my type. You are however highly misinformed, prejudice, racist and off the charts stupid.
Click to expand...


Stupid. You are stupid. I'm none of the things you say.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Debating you is so simple. You are so easy to combate because your ideals are simplistic and comprised of ignorance. Please bring it on jr. I could send in my 12 year old part time to debunk your racist, juvinile, ignorant misinformed narrrative. In the meantime my wife and I will be enjoying a very nice meal at I’ll Gabiano in Miami laughing at you petulant tirades.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No Dave. you can't fuck with me. I'm not  the one misinformed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t want to fuck you. You aren’t my type. You are however highly misinformed, prejudice, racist and off the charts stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stupid. You are stupid. I'm none of the things you say.
Click to expand...

You are all the things I say and more. A stupid ignorant racist moron. Feel free to ad more .


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.
> 
> 
> 
> But it would be the US government paying the reparations.
Click to expand...

Which the government doesn’t have responsibility to do. Go after the ones that sold the slaves in the first place. It isn’t the government you myopic idiot. It’s the taxpayers of which supposedly you are one.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

dave p said:


> Which the government doesn’t have responsibility to do.


One may argue otherwise, given the long amount of time this practice was both sanctioned and protected by the government.


----------



## Coyote

My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents...and in a sense reparations have already been made through affirmative action legislation.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Coyote said:


> My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents.


Why? The descendants of those who died as a result or died without having generational wealth also bear the costs. Descendants of those who perish due to criminal neglect or criminal activity are often awarded damages in our justice system.


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which the government doesn’t have responsibility to do.
> 
> 
> 
> One may argue otherwise, given the long amount of time this practice was both sanctioned and protected by the government.
Click to expand...

One may argue but one would be incorrect.


----------



## Coyote

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents.
> 
> 
> 
> Why? The descendants of those who died as a result or died without having generational wealth also bear the costs. Descendants of those who perish due to criminal neglect or criminal activity are often awarded damages in our justice system.
Click to expand...

Because the further you move from the original the fuzzier it gets.  For example...

Who gets reparations? 
All blacks?
Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
Those who immigrated here post slavery?
What is black?  Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere?  50%....100%....
What is white?
What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

dave p said:


> One may argue but one would


That would be a very weak counter argument on your part.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Coyote said:


> Because the further you move from the original the fuzzier it gets.


True. Not easy to draw the line, is it? Does a person really change into an adult on their 18th birthday? When is a fetus a human?

Drawing these lines is hard, but sometimes we have to do so.


----------



## Coyote

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because the further you move from the original the fuzzier it gets.
> 
> 
> 
> True. Not easy to draw the line, is it? Does a person really change into an adult on their 18th birthday? When is a fetus a human?
> 
> Drawing these lines is hard, but sometimes we have to do so.
Click to expand...

In this case where would you draw the lines and how would you insure they are fair and just?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Coyote said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because the further you move from the original the fuzzier it gets.
> 
> 
> 
> True. Not easy to draw the line, is it? Does a person really change into an adult on their 18th birthday? When is a fetus a human?
> 
> Drawing these lines is hard, but sometimes we have to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In this case where would you draw the lines and how would you insure they are fair and just?
Click to expand...

I don't know.


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> One may argue but one would
> 
> 
> 
> That would be a very weak counter argument on your part.
Click to expand...

Not really. A very weak argument on your part since none of the oppressors are alive. You Convieniently ignore the fact that it was black people in African countries that originally profited from the slave trade.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

dave p said:


> Not really.


Yes, really. "You are wrong" is the weakest of arguments.


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents.
> 
> 
> 
> Why? The descendants of those who died as a result or died without having generational wealth also bear the costs. Descendants of those who perish due to criminal neglect or criminal activity are often awarded damages in our justice system.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the further you move from the original the fuzzier it gets.  For example...
> 
> Who gets reparations?
> All blacks?
> Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
> Those who immigrated here post slavery?
> What is black?  Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere?  50%....100%....
> What is white?
> What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
> How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?
Click to expand...

What about the ones in African countries that sold said slaves into slavery?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

dave p said:


> You Convieniently ignore the fact that it was black people in African countries that originally profited from the slave trade.


I didn't ignore this. I just understand that it is irrelevant in the scope of reparations, given that we only have control of our own government. So it adds nothing, in this context.


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, really. "You are wrong" is the weakest of arguments.
Click to expand...

Nope. Please give us an honest reason. Not an emotional or heartfelt reason. One that is cohearant and inclusive all that profited from the slave trade.


----------



## Unkotare

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Debating you is so simple. You are so easy to combate because your ideals are simplistic and comprised of ignorance. Please bring it on jr. I could send in my 12 year old part time to debunk your racist, juvinile, ignorant misinformed narrrative. In the meantime my wife and I will be enjoying a very nice meal at I’ll Gabiano in Miami laughing at you petulant tirades.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No Dave. you can't fuck with me. I'm not  the one misinformed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t want to fuck you. You aren’t my type. You are however highly misinformed, prejudice, racist and off the charts stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stupid. You are stupid.
Click to expand...



Then you’ve got something in common.


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> You Convieniently ignore the fact that it was black people in African countries that originally profited from the slave trade.
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't ignore this. I just understand that it is irrelevant in the scope of reparations, given that we only have control of our own government. So it adds nothing, in this context.
Click to expand...

How is it irrelevant? It has everything to do in the context of who created harm and is responsible. Please inform us all how it is irrelevant.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

dave p said:


> What about the ones in African countries that sold said slaves into


What about them?


dave p said:


> Nope. Please give us an honest reason. Not an emotional or heartfelt reason


Thats not an appropriate response to the declaration "you're wrong" is a weak argument.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Indeependent said:


> It's obvious Liberals never read what they post and then attempt to divert to how stupid the opposing stance is.
> Thankfully the post is there for all to read.


I'm not a liberal and I post nothing that I have any qualms about being in the public domain so I'm not sure what you're attempting to imply. 

Do you have a will so that when you die your family will inherit your assets or have made provisions for them to be the beneficiaries of an insurance policy?  Those items have tangible value, no?  So while your death ends certains rights for *you*, the *deceased*, it triggers other rights and transfers what wealth you have accumulated to whomever you have designated.  Any wages earned even if they haven't yet been paid are still owed.  Since they can't be paid to you, then by law they have to go to your beneificary or estate.  Are you stating that this is not true or that the law I cited is incorrect?


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about the ones in African countries that sold said slaves into
> 
> 
> 
> What about them?
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Please give us an honest reason. Not an emotional or heartfelt reason
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats not an appropriate response to the declaration "you're wrong" is a weak argument.
Click to expand...

It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor. Pleas tell us all why.


----------



## dave p

Unkotare said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
> 
> 
> 
> Debating you is so simple. You are so easy to combate because your ideals are simplistic and comprised of ignorance. Please bring it on jr. I could send in my 12 year old part time to debunk your racist, juvinile, ignorant misinformed narrrative. In the meantime my wife and I will be enjoying a very nice meal at I’ll Gabiano in Miami laughing at you petulant tirades.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No Dave. you can't fuck with me. I'm not  the one misinformed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t want to fuck you. You aren’t my type. You are however highly misinformed, prejudice, racist and off the charts stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Stupid. You are stupid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Then you’ve got something in common.
Click to expand...

And how is that.please tell us all.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

dave p said:


> It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor.


Unless it is completely appropriate to do so, which is the case this time. When discussing reparations from our government, discussing the actions of foreign actors is not relevant. In fact, it's a tired red herring in this case.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

dave p said:


> They may read them but they don’t comprehend them. A liberal is simply one educated beyond their capacity


So what's your excuse for the ignorance that is on full display here?  The United States has no jurisdiction over African nations but it does have jurisdiction over the racially discriminatory human rights violations it legislated into U.S. law here in the states.  

All you and others have done here today is insult your opponents yet you offer up nothing in support of your wn oposition, no precedence, no case law, no case studies even, only vitriol yet for some strange reason believe that you occupy the moral and intellectual high ground.


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor.
> 
> 
> 
> Unless it is completely appropriate to do so, which is the case this time. When discussing reparations from our government, discussing the actions of foreign actors is not relevant. In fact, it's a tired red herring in this case.
Click to expand...

No it isn’t, the foreign countries participated. Is it because those countries are run by blacks and you are so disengenuous that you can’t bring yourself to accept that blacks did this to other blacks? Why don’t you go after the ancestors of those who owned slaves? Most likely it is because you think this government with its proposed white guilt led by liberals you think it’s an easy target. It’s ok to be honest.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

dave p said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor.
> 
> 
> 
> Unless it is completely appropriate to do so, which is the case this time. When discussing reparations from our government, discussing the actions of foreign actors is not relevant. In fact, it's a tired red herring in this case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t, the foreign countries participated. Is it because those countries are run by blacks and you are so disengenuous that you can’t bring yourself to accept that blacks did this to other blacks? Why don’t you go after the ancestors of those who owned slaves? Most likely it is because you think this government with its proposed white guilt led by liberals you think it’s an easy target. It’s ok to be honest.
Click to expand...

Thank you for guessing as to my motives. I will announce the winner tomorrow morning.

Yes it is irrelevant. But, maybe you would like to explain how it would inform our choice or implementation of reparations form our government. And no, saying "foreign governments participated" is not an explanation. It is reiteration of your claim.


----------



## dave p

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> They may read them but they don’t comprehend them. A liberal is simply one educated beyond their capacity
> 
> 
> 
> So what's your excuse for the ignorance that is on full display here?  The United States has no jurisdiction over African nations but it does have jurisdiction over the racially discriminatory human rights violations it legislated into U.S. law here in the states.
> 
> All you and others have done here today is insult your opponents yet you offer up nothing in support of your wn oposition, no precedence, no case law, no case studies even, only vitriol yet for some strange reason believe that you occupy the moral and intellectual high ground.
Click to expand...

If it is such a burning issue for you, implore the United Nations to get those foreign countries involved. Those countries participated and in fact helped produce slaves. Why not sue the families of those who owned salves? Try being honest and get everyone involved you think are perpetrators. I have not once insulted you or anyone else on the subject. You refuse To answer the basic of questions. You insist on the easy way out and only go after the U.S. Governmemt. 

I don’t believe reparations should be paid period. You refuse to look at all contributors to what you feel is owed.


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor.
> 
> 
> 
> Unless it is completely appropriate to do so, which is the case this time. When discussing reparations from our government, discussing the actions of foreign actors is not relevant. In fact, it's a tired red herring in this case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t, the foreign countries participated. Is it because those countries are run by blacks and you are so disengenuous that you can’t bring yourself to accept that blacks did this to other blacks? Why don’t you go after the ancestors of those who owned slaves? Most likely it is because you think this government with its proposed white guilt led by liberals you think it’s an easy target. It’s ok to be honest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you for guessing as to my motives. I will announce the winner tomorrow morning.
> 
> Yes it is irrelevant. But, maybe you would like to explain how it would inform our choice or implementation of reparations form out government. And no, saying "foreign governments participated" is not an explanation. It is reiteration of your claim.
Click to expand...

You originally said it wasn’t relevant. Please make up your mind. Your deflection is hollow.


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> One may argue but one would
> 
> 
> 
> That would be a very weak counter argument on your part.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really. A very weak argument on your part since none of the oppressors are alive. You Convieniently ignore the fact that it was black people in African countries that originally profited from the slave trade.
Click to expand...

That is a bit disingenuous.  They profited but when the transatlantic slave trade ended slavery and the breeding and selling of human beings continued in America.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

irosie91 said:


> blacks were barred from the benefits of the GI bill?


Apparently

How African American WWII Veterans Were Scorned By the G.I. Bill
A million African Americans joined the military during World War II as volunteers or draftees. Another 1.5 million registered for the draft. But when the war was over, many of those servicemen and women failed to receive their fair share of the benefits under the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 —the G.I. Bill.

Also known as the G.I. Bill Of Rights, the G.I. Bill provided financial support in the form of cash stipends for schooling, low-interest mortgages, job skills training, low-interest loans, and unemployment benefits.

But many African Americans who served in World War II never saw these benefits. This was especially true in the south, where Jim Crow laws excluded black students from “white” schools, and poor black colleges struggled to respond to the rise in demand from returning veterans. After World War II, blacks wanting to attend college in the South were restricted to about 100 public and private schools, few of which offered education beyond the baccalaureate and more than a quarter of which were junior colleges, with the highest degree below the B.A.
....
Thousands of black veterans were denied admission to colleges, loans for housing and business, and excluded from job-training programs. Programs funded by federal money were directed by local officials, who especially in the south, drastically favored white applicants over black.

In 1947, some 70,000 African American veterans were unable to obtain admission to crowded, under-resourced black colleges. The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.

The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.

The GI bill included support for banks to provide veterans low-cost, zero down-payment home loans across the United States. But of the first 67,000 mortgages secured by the G.I. Bill for returning veterans in New York and northern New Jersey alone, fewer than 100 were taken out by non-whites. The G.I. Bill helped place 6,500 former soldiers in Mississippi on nonfarm jobs by fall of 1947, but while 86 percent of the skilled and semiskilled jobs were filled by whites, 92 percent of the unskilled ones were filled by blacks.

In all, 16 million veterans benefited in various ways from the G.I. Bill. President Bill Clinton declared it “the best deal ever made by Uncle Sam,” adding that it “helped to unleash a prosperity never before known.”

For white people, that is. The lack of access to a family home meant a long-term loss of wealth for black Americans. A family home purchased in 1946 in a good neighborhood with a strong tax base and solid schools, became financial wealth to pass onto family members, borrow against to start a business, or to send kids to college.​


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents.
> 
> 
> 
> Why? The descendants of those who died as a result or died without having generational wealth also bear the costs. Descendants of those who perish due to criminal neglect or criminal activity are often awarded damages in our justice system.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the further you move from the original the fuzzier it gets.  For example...
> 
> Who gets reparations?
> All blacks?
> Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
> Those who immigrated here post slavery?
> What is black?  Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere?  50%....100%....
> What is white?
> What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
> How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What about the ones in African countries that sold said slaves into slavery?
Click to expand...

They aren’t American so they are irrelevant.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

IM2 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Considering he was counting what happened after slavery *
> 
> Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well he did it. If you have a problem with it, you have his name. Man up, go to him and bitch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I have a problem with his terrible math?
> He's never going to see a dollar of reparations either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His math is fine.  And like I said, you can talk all your white boy bolo bullshit about what you're not going to pay, but the day will come that you will pay. No you won't pay reparations but when that payment is due, you will wish you had. Pray that you are not alive when that day comes.
Click to expand...


His math is moronic. And pointless.
You will never ever get reparations.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

dave p said:


> You originally said it wasn’t relevant.


And i still do. And my invitation to you to describe how it is relevant and should inform our choice or degree of implementation of reparations still stands.


----------



## Intolerant




----------



## Ridgerunner

IM2 said:


> The same places the annual payments to Native American Tribes come from. Money paid because of what your ancestors did.



I'm Chinese...


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

dave p said:


> If it is such a burning issue for you, implore the United Nations to get those foreign countries involved. Those countries participated and in fact helped produce slaves. Why not sue the families of those who owned salves? Try being honest and get everyone involved you think are perpetrators. I have not once insulted you or anyone else on the subject. You refuse To answer the basic of questions. You insist on the easy way out and only go after the U.S. Governmemt.
> 
> I don’t believe reparations should be paid period. You refuse to look at all contributors to what you feel is owed.


Wow, where to start, what questions have I refused to answer?

If a person kidnaps a child and either sells or gives them to you, does the fact that you didn't go out and abduct the child yourself absolve you of the crimes involved in human trafficking if you then in turn do anything with that child other than calling the authorities?  

What is someone kidnapped one of your children?  I would expect that you would call the police and expect them to do everything humanly and legally possible to not only return your child to you, preferably before any harm could come to her, but to also fully punish the person(s) who took her,  Now imagine that because of your race in the event that someone does come along and steals one of your children with the full intent of doing unspeakable things to your child you have no rights under the law to have the police go after the person or even to go after the person yourself and if you do, then you will be the one arrested and/or killed for daring to attack a member of the "superior" race.

Can you imagine living in a world where this is how things are?  The only reason for this being the case is because these were the laws that were drafted, legislated and enforced by the various governments in the U.S.  The individuals who participated in the heinous institution of chattel slavery in the U.S. were only able to do so because of the laws, policies and procedures that were in place during the centuries of slavery and then replaced with the weaker but still racially discriminatory and inhumane in many cases laws of "separate but equal", Jim Crow laws, Black Codes, etc. all based on the premise of white superiority and black inferiority.   Our governments created a society were this was the norm therefore they are the ones responsible for creating the harm, codifing it and enforcing it at the end of a whip and the barrel of a gun.  This is best I can come up with this evening by way of an explanation.


----------



## irosie91

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> blacks were barred from the benefits of the GI bill?
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently
> 
> How African American WWII Veterans Were Scorned By the G.I. Bill
> A million African Americans joined the military during World War II as volunteers or draftees. Another 1.5 million registered for the draft. But when the war was over, many of those servicemen and women failed to receive their fair share of the benefits under the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 —the G.I. Bill.
> 
> Also known as the G.I. Bill Of Rights, the G.I. Bill provided financial support in the form of cash stipends for schooling, low-interest mortgages, job skills training, low-interest loans, and unemployment benefits.
> 
> But many African Americans who served in World War II never saw these benefits. This was especially true in the south, where Jim Crow laws excluded black students from “white” schools, and poor black colleges struggled to respond to the rise in demand from returning veterans. After World War II, blacks wanting to attend college in the South were restricted to about 100 public and private schools, few of which offered education beyond the baccalaureate and more than a quarter of which were junior colleges, with the highest degree below the B.A.
> ....
> Thousands of black veterans were denied admission to colleges, loans for housing and business, and excluded from job-training programs. Programs funded by federal money were directed by local officials, who especially in the south, drastically favored white applicants over black.
> 
> In 1947, some 70,000 African American veterans were unable to obtain admission to crowded, under-resourced black colleges. The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.
> 
> The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.
> 
> The GI bill included support for banks to provide veterans low-cost, zero down-payment home loans across the United States. But of the first 67,000 mortgages secured by the G.I. Bill for returning veterans in New York and northern New Jersey alone, fewer than 100 were taken out by non-whites. The G.I. Bill helped place 6,500 former soldiers in Mississippi on nonfarm jobs by fall of 1947, but while 86 percent of the skilled and semiskilled jobs were filled by whites, 92 percent of the unskilled ones were filled by blacks.
> 
> In all, 16 million veterans benefited in various ways from the G.I. Bill. President Bill Clinton declared it “the best deal ever made by Uncle Sam,” adding that it “helped to unleash a prosperity never before known.”
> 
> For white people, that is. The lack of access to a family home meant a long-term loss of wealth for black Americans. A family home purchased in 1946 in a good neighborhood with a strong tax base and solid schools, became financial wealth to pass onto family members, borrow against to start a business, or to send kids to college.​
Click to expand...


not the whole story-------in order to BENEFIT from the benefits----the veteran had to APPLY FOR THEM.     I was navy-----not all that long ago------I had a HARD TIME convincing kids who were leaving to  ------TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE GI BILL.  So many just  DID NOT WANT TO.   ----THEY HAD OTHER PLANS..     I have no doubt that part of the problem was discrimination------but ANOTHER PART------was---JUST NOT 
INTERESTED.       I live in the north east------my perspective is flawed with regard to OPPORTUNITY.    My dad did some nite school -----on the GI bill        no degree----just a minor profession thing-------he was white -----served in the Navy during world war II.      I cannot imagine that his little nite school classes were closed to blacks UP HERE


----------



## irosie91

Coyote said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> One may argue but one would
> 
> 
> 
> That would be a very weak counter argument on your part.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really. A very weak argument on your part since none of the oppressors are alive. You Convieniently ignore the fact that it was black people in African countries that originally profited from the slave trade.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a bit disingenuous.  They profited but when the transatlantic slave trade ended slavery and the breeding and selling of human beings continued in America.
Click to expand...


the breeding and selling of human beings......??????


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> You originally said it wasn’t relevant.
> 
> 
> 
> And i still do. And my invitation to you to describe how it is relevant and should inform our choice or degree of implementation of reparations still stands.
Click to expand...

Make up your mind on relevance you have said it both ways. I will humor you. It is apparent to anyone. If you want to hold one country responsible for harm caused, all countries that participated should be held responsible.


----------



## dave p

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it is such a burning issue for you, implore the United Nations to get those foreign countries involved. Those countries participated and in fact helped produce slaves. Why not sue the families of those who owned salves? Try being honest and get everyone involved you think are perpetrators. I have not once insulted you or anyone else on the subject. You refuse To answer the basic of questions. You insist on the easy way out and only go after the U.S. Governmemt.
> 
> I don’t believe reparations should be paid period. You refuse to look at all contributors to what you feel is owed.
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, where to start, what questions have I refused to answer?
> 
> If a person kidnaps a child and either sells or gives them to you, does the fact that you didn't go out and abduct the child yourself absolve you of the crimes involved in human trafficking if you then in turn do anything with that child other than calling the authorities?
> 
> What is someone kidnapped one of your children?  I would expect that you would call the police and expect them to do everything humanly and legally possible to not only return your child to you, preferably before any harm could come to her, but to also fully punish the person(s) who took her,  Now imagine that because of your race in the event that someone does come along and steals one of your children with the full intent of doing unspeakable things to your child you have no rights under the law to have the police go after the person or even to go after the person yourself and if you do, then you will be the one arrested and/or killed for daring to attack a member of the "superior" race.
> 
> Can you imagine living in a world where this is how things are?  The only reason for this being the case is because these were the laws that were drafted, legislated and enforced by the various governments in the U.S.  The individuals who participated in the heinous institution of chattel slavery in the U.S. were only able to do so because of the laws, policies and procedures that were in place during the centuries of slavery and then replaced with the weaker but still racially discriminatory and inhumane in many cases laws of "separate but equal", Jim Crow laws, Black Codes, etc. all based on the premise of white superiority and black inferiority.   Our governments created a society were this was the norm therefore they are the ones responsible for creating the harm, codifing it and enforcing it at the end of a whip and the barrel of a gun.  This is best I can come up with this evening by way of an explanation.
Click to expand...

So why do you only want the U.S.Government to pay?


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s very appropriate. You don’t propose a compelling argument and chose to ignore an important factor.
> 
> 
> 
> Unless it is completely appropriate to do so, which is the case this time. When discussing reparations from our government, discussing the actions of foreign actors is not relevant. In fact, it's a tired red herring in this case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t, the foreign countries participated. Is it because those countries are run by blacks and you are so disengenuous that you can’t bring yourself to accept that blacks did this to other blacks? Why don’t you go after the ancestors of those who owned slaves? Most likely it is because you think this government with its proposed white guilt led by liberals you think it’s an easy target. It’s ok to be honest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you for guessing as to my motives. I will announce the winner tomorrow morning.
> 
> Yes it is irrelevant. But, maybe you would like to explain how it would inform our choice or implementation of reparations form our government. And no, saying "foreign governments participated" is not an explanation. It is reiteration of your claim.
Click to expand...

The claim is factual and is indeed part of the chain of repression. I still stand by my statement. “Reparations are due to no one”.


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents.
> 
> 
> 
> Why? The descendants of those who died as a result or died without having generational wealth also bear the costs. Descendants of those who perish due to criminal neglect or criminal activity are often awarded damages in our justice system.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the further you move from the original the fuzzier it gets.  For example...
> 
> Who gets reparations?
> All blacks?
> Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
> Those who immigrated here post slavery?
> What is black?  Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere?  50%....100%....
> What is white?
> What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
> How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What about the ones in African countries that sold said slaves into slavery?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren’t American so they are irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. They supported the trade. I guess since Germany isn’t American, it is irrelevant when speaking of genocide in world war 2.


----------



## August West

Toro said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We shouldn't pay reparations.
> 
> Why would I want to pay off some crackers just because we freed all the black people?
Click to expand...

180,000 black soldiers fought in the Civil War. What`s this "we freed all the black people" nonsense?


----------



## IM2

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> blacks were barred from the benefits of the GI bill?
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently
> 
> How African American WWII Veterans Were Scorned By the G.I. Bill
> A million African Americans joined the military during World War II as volunteers or draftees. Another 1.5 million registered for the draft. But when the war was over, many of those servicemen and women failed to receive their fair share of the benefits under the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 —the G.I. Bill.
> 
> Also known as the G.I. Bill Of Rights, the G.I. Bill provided financial support in the form of cash stipends for schooling, low-interest mortgages, job skills training, low-interest loans, and unemployment benefits.
> 
> But many African Americans who served in World War II never saw these benefits. This was especially true in the south, where Jim Crow laws excluded black students from “white” schools, and poor black colleges struggled to respond to the rise in demand from returning veterans. After World War II, blacks wanting to attend college in the South were restricted to about 100 public and private schools, few of which offered education beyond the baccalaureate and more than a quarter of which were junior colleges, with the highest degree below the B.A.
> ....
> Thousands of black veterans were denied admission to colleges, loans for housing and business, and excluded from job-training programs. Programs funded by federal money were directed by local officials, who especially in the south, drastically favored white applicants over black.
> 
> In 1947, some 70,000 African American veterans were unable to obtain admission to crowded, under-resourced black colleges. The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.
> 
> The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.
> 
> The GI bill included support for banks to provide veterans low-cost, zero down-payment home loans across the United States. But of the first 67,000 mortgages secured by the G.I. Bill for returning veterans in New York and northern New Jersey alone, fewer than 100 were taken out by non-whites. The G.I. Bill helped place 6,500 former soldiers in Mississippi on nonfarm jobs by fall of 1947, but while 86 percent of the skilled and semiskilled jobs were filled by whites, 92 percent of the unskilled ones were filled by blacks.
> 
> In all, 16 million veterans benefited in various ways from the G.I. Bill. President Bill Clinton declared it “the best deal ever made by Uncle Sam,” adding that it “helped to unleash a prosperity never before known.”
> 
> For white people, that is. The lack of access to a family home meant a long-term loss of wealth for black Americans. A family home purchased in 1946 in a good neighborhood with a strong tax base and solid schools, became financial wealth to pass onto family members, borrow against to start a business, or to send kids to college.​
Click to expand...


My father served in WW2 and did not get these benefits. So me my and my brothers lives were affected by that loss of opportunity also. So many of you whites in here argue in opposition mindlessly unaware of how the laws and policies you don't want to, or are to scared to, discuss have benefited whites and created damage to black families and communities.


----------



## IM2

Toddsterpatriot said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Considering he was counting what happened after slavery *
> 
> Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well he did it. If you have a problem with it, you have his name. Man up, go to him and bitch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I have a problem with his terrible math?
> He's never going to see a dollar of reparations either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His math is fine.  And like I said, you can talk all your white boy bolo bullshit about what you're not going to pay, but the day will come that you will pay. No you won't pay reparations but when that payment is due, you will wish you had. Pray that you are not alive when that day comes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His math is moronic. And pointless.
> You will never ever get reparations.
Click to expand...


His math is right. But I'm not really concerned about you repeating how I am no fig to get reparations everyday like that's suppose to mean something. We are owed money no mater if you say this every day for the rest of your life. But as America gets browner and browner you'll understand how whites are paying the price because of the arrogance of those like you.


----------



## IM2

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> They may read them but they don’t comprehend them. A liberal is simply one educated beyond their capacity
> 
> 
> 
> So what's your excuse for the ignorance that is on full display here?  The United States has no jurisdiction over African nations but it does have jurisdiction over the racially discriminatory human rights violations it legislated into U.S. law here in the states.
> 
> All you and others have done here today is insult your opponents yet you offer up nothing in support of your wn oposition, no precedence, no case law, no case studies even, only vitriol yet for some strange reason believe that you occupy the moral and intellectual high ground.
Click to expand...


He can't do any better. He's dumb. This opposion and qustions are based on a load of stupidity. I mean reparations for whites who helped on the underground railroad? That's dumb. Those whites were free and had every legal right offered by this nation. Affirmative Action as reparations? Whites have benefitted the most from the policy. Who can prove they are black? C'mon this is ridiculous and just simply reaching for any straw you can.

And as usual, the ignorant argument of backs selling each other according to whites  while ignoring that whites purchased the slaves as well as the process whites used to get it done. And then the absolutely purposeful refusal to recognize 100 years after slavery like everything ends with slavery to pretend that reparations are only about slavery.

The whites here appear not to have the same knowledge or understanding of these things. It's apparent they have not done the in depth study to learn how things really happened and are just arguing against reparations based on half baked white tales and opinions really not based in fact. The fact is whites are paying Native Americans every year for things long ago. The precedent has been set and these anti reparations arguments really are seriously without merit.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> They may read them but they don’t comprehend them. A liberal is simply one educated beyond their capacity
> 
> 
> 
> So what's your excuse for the ignorance that is on full display here?  The United States has no jurisdiction over African nations but it does have jurisdiction over the racially discriminatory human rights violations it legislated into U.S. law here in the states.
> 
> All you and others have done here today is insult your opponents yet you offer up nothing in support of your wn oposition, no precedence, no case law, no case studies even, only vitriol yet for some strange reason believe that you occupy the moral and intellectual high ground.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He can't do any better. He's dumb. This opposion and qustions are based on a load of stupidity. I mean reparations for whites who helped on the underground railroad? That's dumb. Those whites were free and had every legal right offered by this nation. Affirmative Action as reparations? Whites have benefitted the most from the policy. Who can prove they are black? C'mon this is ridiculous and just simply reaching for any straw you can.
> 
> And as usual, the ignorant argument of backs selling each other according to whites  while ignoring that whites purchased the slaves as well as the process whites used to get it done. And then the absolutely purposeful refusal to recognize 100 years after slavery like everything ends with slavery to pretend that reparations are only about slavery.
> 
> The whites here appear not to have the same knowledge or understanding of these things. It's apparent they have not done the in depth study to learn how things really happened and are just arguing against reparations based on half baked white tales and opinions really not based in fact. The fact is whites are paying Native Americans every year for things long ago. The precedent has been set and these anti reparations arguments really are seriously without merit.
Click to expand...

I recognize what the whites have done. I never mentioned reparations for whites on the Underground Railroad, not sure where that came from.I also look at the big picture of everyone involved in the chain of harm. You and the other that I was posting to, don’t or you chose to ignore it. You assume that you are the only person that has done homework and you want to say you are the only one that understands the situation and claim your authority of the situation. That is completely arrogant, self serving and categorically wrong.

No reparations for slavery.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> They may read them but they don’t comprehend them. A liberal is simply one educated beyond their capacity
> 
> 
> 
> So what's your excuse for the ignorance that is on full display here?  The United States has no jurisdiction over African nations but it does have jurisdiction over the racially discriminatory human rights violations it legislated into U.S. law here in the states.
> 
> All you and others have done here today is insult your opponents yet you offer up nothing in support of your wn oposition, no precedence, no case law, no case studies even, only vitriol yet for some strange reason believe that you occupy the moral and intellectual high ground.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He can't do any better. He's dumb. This opposion and qustions are based on a load of stupidity. I mean reparations for whites who helped on the underground railroad? That's dumb. Those whites were free and had every legal right offered by this nation. Affirmative Action as reparations? Whites have benefitted the most from the policy. Who can prove they are black? C'mon this is ridiculous and just simply reaching for any straw you can.
> 
> And as usual, the ignorant argument of backs selling each other according to whites  while ignoring that whites purchased the slaves as well as the process whites used to get it done. And then the absolutely purposeful refusal to recognize 100 years after slavery like everything ends with slavery to pretend that reparations are only about slavery.
> 
> The whites here appear not to have the same knowledge or understanding of these things. It's apparent they have not done the in depth study to learn how things really happened and are just arguing against reparations based on half baked white tales and opinions really not based in fact. The fact is whites are paying Native Americans every year for things long ago. The precedent has been set and these anti reparations arguments really are seriously without merit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I recognize what the whites have done. I never mentioned reparations for whites on the Underground Railroad, not sure where that came from.I also look at the big picture of everyone involved in the chain of harm. You and the other that I was posting to, don’t or you chose to ignore it. You assume that you are the only person that has done homework and you want to say you are the only one that understands the situation and claim your authority of the situation. That is completely arrogant, self serving and categorically wrong.
> 
> No reparations for slavery.
Click to expand...


I was not talking just about you. I don't assume a damn thing. You have not done the homework if you don't think reparations are warranted. And you definitely haven't done your homework if you keep saying no reparations for slavery since reparations are not just for slavery. So if we don't get reparations for slavery we still are owed for the human rights violations caused by the system of apartheid in America that lasted by written law from 1776 until at least 1965.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> They may read them but they don’t comprehend them. A liberal is simply one educated beyond their capacity
> 
> 
> 
> So what's your excuse for the ignorance that is on full display here?  The United States has no jurisdiction over African nations but it does have jurisdiction over the racially discriminatory human rights violations it legislated into U.S. law here in the states.
> 
> All you and others have done here today is insult your opponents yet you offer up nothing in support of your wn oposition, no precedence, no case law, no case studies even, only vitriol yet for some strange reason believe that you occupy the moral and intellectual high ground.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He can't do any better. He's dumb. This opposion and qustions are based on a load of stupidity. I mean reparations for whites who helped on the underground railroad? That's dumb. Those whites were free and had every legal right offered by this nation. Affirmative Action as reparations? Whites have benefitted the most from the policy. Who can prove they are black? C'mon this is ridiculous and just simply reaching for any straw you can.
> 
> And as usual, the ignorant argument of backs selling each other according to whites  while ignoring that whites purchased the slaves as well as the process whites used to get it done. And then the absolutely purposeful refusal to recognize 100 years after slavery like everything ends with slavery to pretend that reparations are only about slavery.
> 
> The whites here appear not to have the same knowledge or understanding of these things. It's apparent they have not done the in depth study to learn how things really happened and are just arguing against reparations based on half baked white tales and opinions really not based in fact. The fact is whites are paying Native Americans every year for things long ago. The precedent has been set and these anti reparations arguments really are seriously without merit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I recognize what the whites have done. I never mentioned reparations for whites on the Underground Railroad, not sure where that came from.I also look at the big picture of everyone involved in the chain of harm. You and the other that I was posting to, don’t or you chose to ignore it. You assume that you are the only person that has done homework and you want to say you are the only one that understands the situation and claim your authority of the situation. That is completely arrogant, self serving and categorically wrong.
> 
> No reparations for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I was not talking just about you. I don't assume a damn thing. You have not done the homework if you don't think reparations are warranted. And you definitely haven't done your homework if you keep saying no reparations for slavery since reparations are not just for slavery. So if we don't get reparations for slavery we still are owed for the human rights violations caused by the system of apartheid in America that lasted by written law from 1776 until at least 1965.
Click to expand...

I have done plenty of homework. We have different views on the issue. You stand by yours, I stand by mine.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> They may read them but they don’t comprehend them. A liberal is simply one educated beyond their capacity
> 
> 
> 
> So what's your excuse for the ignorance that is on full display here?  The United States has no jurisdiction over African nations but it does have jurisdiction over the racially discriminatory human rights violations it legislated into U.S. law here in the states.
> 
> All you and others have done here today is insult your opponents yet you offer up nothing in support of your wn oposition, no precedence, no case law, no case studies even, only vitriol yet for some strange reason believe that you occupy the moral and intellectual high ground.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He can't do any better. He's dumb. This opposion and qustions are based on a load of stupidity. I mean reparations for whites who helped on the underground railroad? That's dumb. Those whites were free and had every legal right offered by this nation. Affirmative Action as reparations? Whites have benefitted the most from the policy. Who can prove they are black? C'mon this is ridiculous and just simply reaching for any straw you can.
> 
> And as usual, the ignorant argument of backs selling each other according to whites  while ignoring that whites purchased the slaves as well as the process whites used to get it done. And then the absolutely purposeful refusal to recognize 100 years after slavery like everything ends with slavery to pretend that reparations are only about slavery.
> 
> The whites here appear not to have the same knowledge or understanding of these things. It's apparent they have not done the in depth study to learn how things really happened and are just arguing against reparations based on half baked white tales and opinions really not based in fact. The fact is whites are paying Native Americans every year for things long ago. The precedent has been set and these anti reparations arguments really are seriously without merit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I recognize what the whites have done. I never mentioned reparations for whites on the Underground Railroad, not sure where that came from.I also look at the big picture of everyone involved in the chain of harm. You and the other that I was posting to, don’t or you chose to ignore it. You assume that you are the only person that has done homework and you want to say you are the only one that understands the situation and claim your authority of the situation. That is completely arrogant, self serving and categorically wrong.
> 
> No reparations for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I was not talking just about you. I don't assume a damn thing. You have not done the homework if you don't think reparations are warranted. And you definitely haven't done your homework if you keep saying no reparations for slavery since reparations are not just for slavery. So if we don't get reparations for slavery we still are owed for the human rights violations caused by the system of apartheid in America that lasted by written law from 1776 until at least 1965.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have done plenty of homework. We have different views on the issue. You stand by yours, I stand by mine.
Click to expand...



Fair enough, but your view has no validity.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what's your excuse for the ignorance that is on full display here?  The United States has no jurisdiction over African nations but it does have jurisdiction over the racially discriminatory human rights violations it legislated into U.S. law here in the states.
> 
> All you and others have done here today is insult your opponents yet you offer up nothing in support of your wn oposition, no precedence, no case law, no case studies even, only vitriol yet for some strange reason believe that you occupy the moral and intellectual high ground.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He can't do any better. He's dumb. This opposion and qustions are based on a load of stupidity. I mean reparations for whites who helped on the underground railroad? That's dumb. Those whites were free and had every legal right offered by this nation. Affirmative Action as reparations? Whites have benefitted the most from the policy. Who can prove they are black? C'mon this is ridiculous and just simply reaching for any straw you can.
> 
> And as usual, the ignorant argument of backs selling each other according to whites  while ignoring that whites purchased the slaves as well as the process whites used to get it done. And then the absolutely purposeful refusal to recognize 100 years after slavery like everything ends with slavery to pretend that reparations are only about slavery.
> 
> The whites here appear not to have the same knowledge or understanding of these things. It's apparent they have not done the in depth study to learn how things really happened and are just arguing against reparations based on half baked white tales and opinions really not based in fact. The fact is whites are paying Native Americans every year for things long ago. The precedent has been set and these anti reparations arguments really are seriously without merit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I recognize what the whites have done. I never mentioned reparations for whites on the Underground Railroad, not sure where that came from.I also look at the big picture of everyone involved in the chain of harm. You and the other that I was posting to, don’t or you chose to ignore it. You assume that you are the only person that has done homework and you want to say you are the only one that understands the situation and claim your authority of the situation. That is completely arrogant, self serving and categorically wrong.
> 
> No reparations for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I was not talking just about you. I don't assume a damn thing. You have not done the homework if you don't think reparations are warranted. And you definitely haven't done your homework if you keep saying no reparations for slavery since reparations are not just for slavery. So if we don't get reparations for slavery we still are owed for the human rights violations caused by the system of apartheid in America that lasted by written law from 1776 until at least 1965.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have done plenty of homework. We have different views on the issue. You stand by yours, I stand by mine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Fair enough, but your view has no validity.
Click to expand...

  Your view has no validity.


----------



## irosie91

IM2 said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> blacks were barred from the benefits of the GI bill?
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently
> 
> How African American WWII Veterans Were Scorned By the G.I. Bill
> A million African Americans joined the military during World War II as volunteers or draftees. Another 1.5 million registered for the draft. But when the war was over, many of those servicemen and women failed to receive their fair share of the benefits under the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 —the G.I. Bill.
> 
> Also known as the G.I. Bill Of Rights, the G.I. Bill provided financial support in the form of cash stipends for schooling, low-interest mortgages, job skills training, low-interest loans, and unemployment benefits.
> 
> But many African Americans who served in World War II never saw these benefits. This was especially true in the south, where Jim Crow laws excluded black students from “white” schools, and poor black colleges struggled to respond to the rise in demand from returning veterans. After World War II, blacks wanting to attend college in the South were restricted to about 100 public and private schools, few of which offered education beyond the baccalaureate and more than a quarter of which were junior colleges, with the highest degree below the B.A.
> ....
> Thousands of black veterans were denied admission to colleges, loans for housing and business, and excluded from job-training programs. Programs funded by federal money were directed by local officials, who especially in the south, drastically favored white applicants over black.
> 
> In 1947, some 70,000 African American veterans were unable to obtain admission to crowded, under-resourced black colleges. The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.
> 
> The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.
> 
> The GI bill included support for banks to provide veterans low-cost, zero down-payment home loans across the United States. But of the first 67,000 mortgages secured by the G.I. Bill for returning veterans in New York and northern New Jersey alone, fewer than 100 were taken out by non-whites. The G.I. Bill helped place 6,500 former soldiers in Mississippi on nonfarm jobs by fall of 1947, but while 86 percent of the skilled and semiskilled jobs were filled by whites, 92 percent of the unskilled ones were filled by blacks.
> 
> In all, 16 million veterans benefited in various ways from the G.I. Bill. President Bill Clinton declared it “the best deal ever made by Uncle Sam,” adding that it “helped to unleash a prosperity never before known.”
> 
> For white people, that is. The lack of access to a family home meant a long-term loss of wealth for black Americans. A family home purchased in 1946 in a good neighborhood with a strong tax base and solid schools, became financial wealth to pass onto family members, borrow against to start a business, or to send kids to college.​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My father served in WW2 and did not get these benefits. So me my and my brothers lives were affected by that loss of opportunity also. So many of you whites in here argue in opposition mindlessly unaware of how the laws and policies you don't want to, or are to scared to, discuss have benefited whites and created damage to black families and communities.
Click to expand...


do you have any idea at as to just what the  "benefits"  were or are?    I will
help-------you get some assistance in paying the tuition for some education---
for a period of time. 
and you get a little boost in being able to obtain a house mortgage.     I am entitled to the Mortgage thing--------but never used it.     It actually would have made VERY LITTLE DIFFERENCE if I had based on what the mortgage rates have been.   If you never apply for a mortgage ---it just does NOTHING.  A VH LOAN is not much different from a non VH loan     Are
you afraid to say just what it is you imagine your father WOULD have done
with the benefits had he used them?    My dad attended nite school to train as
a watch maker.     He never profited from the craft------TIMEX and cheap watches intervened.    Do you get your watch CLEANED every year?    He did
do it a little-------I used to play with the worn out MAIN SPRINGS   (ya got any idea what  a main spring is?)


----------



## IM2

Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.

Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> He can't do any better. He's dumb. This opposion and qustions are based on a load of stupidity. I mean reparations for whites who helped on the underground railroad? That's dumb. Those whites were free and had every legal right offered by this nation. Affirmative Action as reparations? Whites have benefitted the most from the policy. Who can prove they are black? C'mon this is ridiculous and just simply reaching for any straw you can.
> 
> And as usual, the ignorant argument of backs selling each other according to whites  while ignoring that whites purchased the slaves as well as the process whites used to get it done. And then the absolutely purposeful refusal to recognize 100 years after slavery like everything ends with slavery to pretend that reparations are only about slavery.
> 
> The whites here appear not to have the same knowledge or understanding of these things. It's apparent they have not done the in depth study to learn how things really happened and are just arguing against reparations based on half baked white tales and opinions really not based in fact. The fact is whites are paying Native Americans every year for things long ago. The precedent has been set and these anti reparations arguments really are seriously without merit.
> 
> 
> 
> I recognize what the whites have done. I never mentioned reparations for whites on the Underground Railroad, not sure where that came from.I also look at the big picture of everyone involved in the chain of harm. You and the other that I was posting to, don’t or you chose to ignore it. You assume that you are the only person that has done homework and you want to say you are the only one that understands the situation and claim your authority of the situation. That is completely arrogant, self serving and categorically wrong.
> 
> No reparations for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I was not talking just about you. I don't assume a damn thing. You have not done the homework if you don't think reparations are warranted. And you definitely haven't done your homework if you keep saying no reparations for slavery since reparations are not just for slavery. So if we don't get reparations for slavery we still are owed for the human rights violations caused by the system of apartheid in America that lasted by written law from 1776 until at least 1965.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have done plenty of homework. We have different views on the issue. You stand by yours, I stand by mine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Fair enough, but your view has no validity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your view has no validity.
Click to expand...


Between us, my view is the one that has all the validity.


----------



## katsteve2012

IM2 said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> blacks were barred from the benefits of the GI bill?
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently
> 
> How African American WWII Veterans Were Scorned By the G.I. Bill
> A million African Americans joined the military during World War II as volunteers or draftees. Another 1.5 million registered for the draft. But when the war was over, many of those servicemen and women failed to receive their fair share of the benefits under the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 —the G.I. Bill.
> 
> Also known as the G.I. Bill Of Rights, the G.I. Bill provided financial support in the form of cash stipends for schooling, low-interest mortgages, job skills training, low-interest loans, and unemployment benefits.
> 
> But many African Americans who served in World War II never saw these benefits. This was especially true in the south, where Jim Crow laws excluded black students from “white” schools, and poor black colleges struggled to respond to the rise in demand from returning veterans. After World War II, blacks wanting to attend college in the South were restricted to about 100 public and private schools, few of which offered education beyond the baccalaureate and more than a quarter of which were junior colleges, with the highest degree below the B.A.
> ....
> Thousands of black veterans were denied admission to colleges, loans for housing and business, and excluded from job-training programs. Programs funded by federal money were directed by local officials, who especially in the south, drastically favored white applicants over black.
> 
> In 1947, some 70,000 African American veterans were unable to obtain admission to crowded, under-resourced black colleges. The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.
> 
> The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.
> 
> The GI bill included support for banks to provide veterans low-cost, zero down-payment home loans across the United States. But of the first 67,000 mortgages secured by the G.I. Bill for returning veterans in New York and northern New Jersey alone, fewer than 100 were taken out by non-whites. The G.I. Bill helped place 6,500 former soldiers in Mississippi on nonfarm jobs by fall of 1947, but while 86 percent of the skilled and semiskilled jobs were filled by whites, 92 percent of the unskilled ones were filled by blacks.
> 
> In all, 16 million veterans benefited in various ways from the G.I. Bill. President Bill Clinton declared it “the best deal ever made by Uncle Sam,” adding that it “helped to unleash a prosperity never before known.”
> 
> For white people, that is. The lack of access to a family home meant a long-term loss of wealth for black Americans. A family home purchased in 1946 in a good neighborhood with a strong tax base and solid schools, became financial wealth to pass onto family members, borrow against to start a business, or to send kids to college.​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My father served in WW2 and did not get these benefits. So me my and my brothers lives were affected by that loss of opportunity also. So many of you whites in here argue in opposition mindlessly unaware of how the laws and policies you don't want to, or are to scared to, discuss have benefited whites and created damage to black families and communities.
Click to expand...



Mine also. In the Navy. Most Black veterans were not able to make use of the HOUSING provisions of the GI Bill for the most part. I can recall my father's frustration in not being able to use that benefit to secure a home after he was discharged from the navy. So after his discharge,  we spent the next 7 years living in a tiny apartment in a not so good area, while he worked 2 jobs to save for a down payment instead of getting a zero down VA loan.

But he eventually got us a nice first home, no thanks to the benefit that he should have been able to use to do it sooner.

Banks generally wouldn't make loans for mortgages in black neighborhoods, and African-Americans were excluded from the suburbs by a combination of deed covenants and informal racism.

The GI Bill helped foster a long-term boost in white generational  wealth but did almost nothing to help blacks to build wealth.

Many are still living with the effects of that exclusion today -- and will be for a long time to come.

There was one big upside of the GI Bill, which is that it did pay for many black veterans to go to college and graduate school.

While these veterans were often only able to choose among overcrowded black colleges, the influx of subsidized black students forced many white universities to open their doors to nonwhites, helping begin the integration of higher education.


----------



## IM2

irosie91 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> blacks were barred from the benefits of the GI bill?
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently
> 
> How African American WWII Veterans Were Scorned By the G.I. Bill
> A million African Americans joined the military during World War II as volunteers or draftees. Another 1.5 million registered for the draft. But when the war was over, many of those servicemen and women failed to receive their fair share of the benefits under the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944 —the G.I. Bill.
> 
> Also known as the G.I. Bill Of Rights, the G.I. Bill provided financial support in the form of cash stipends for schooling, low-interest mortgages, job skills training, low-interest loans, and unemployment benefits.
> 
> But many African Americans who served in World War II never saw these benefits. This was especially true in the south, where Jim Crow laws excluded black students from “white” schools, and poor black colleges struggled to respond to the rise in demand from returning veterans. After World War II, blacks wanting to attend college in the South were restricted to about 100 public and private schools, few of which offered education beyond the baccalaureate and more than a quarter of which were junior colleges, with the highest degree below the B.A.
> ....
> Thousands of black veterans were denied admission to colleges, loans for housing and business, and excluded from job-training programs. Programs funded by federal money were directed by local officials, who especially in the south, drastically favored white applicants over black.
> 
> In 1947, some 70,000 African American veterans were unable to obtain admission to crowded, under-resourced black colleges. The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.
> 
> The University of Pennsylvania—one of the least-discriminatory schools at the time—enrolled only 40 African American students in its 1946 student body of 9,000.
> 
> The GI bill included support for banks to provide veterans low-cost, zero down-payment home loans across the United States. But of the first 67,000 mortgages secured by the G.I. Bill for returning veterans in New York and northern New Jersey alone, fewer than 100 were taken out by non-whites. The G.I. Bill helped place 6,500 former soldiers in Mississippi on nonfarm jobs by fall of 1947, but while 86 percent of the skilled and semiskilled jobs were filled by whites, 92 percent of the unskilled ones were filled by blacks.
> 
> In all, 16 million veterans benefited in various ways from the G.I. Bill. President Bill Clinton declared it “the best deal ever made by Uncle Sam,” adding that it “helped to unleash a prosperity never before known.”
> 
> For white people, that is. The lack of access to a family home meant a long-term loss of wealth for black Americans. A family home purchased in 1946 in a good neighborhood with a strong tax base and solid schools, became financial wealth to pass onto family members, borrow against to start a business, or to send kids to college.​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My father served in WW2 and did not get these benefits. So me my and my brothers lives were affected by that loss of opportunity also. So many of you whites in here argue in opposition mindlessly unaware of how the laws and policies you don't want to, or are to scared to, discuss have benefited whites and created damage to black families and communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> do you have any idea at as to just what the  "benefits"  were or are?    I will
> help-------you get some assistance in paying the tuition for some education---
> for a period of time.
> and you get a little boost in being able to obtain a house mortgage.     I am entitled to the Mortgage thing--------but never used it.     It actually would have made VERY LITTLE DIFFERENCE if I had based on what the mortgage rates have been.   If you never apply for a mortgage ---it just does NOTHING.  A VH LOAN is not much different from a non VH loan     Are
> you afraid to say just what it is you imagine your father WOULD have done
> with the benefits had he used them?    My dad attended nite school to train as
> a watch maker.     He never profited from the craft------TIMEX and cheap watches intervened.    Do you get your watch CLEANED every year?    He did
> do it a little-------I used to play with the worn out MAIN SPRINGS   (ya got any idea what  a main spring is?)
Click to expand...


irosie, I know the benefits of which my father did not get. I also know that getting the benefits is better than not. These excuses you whites are trying make get old fast. Todays GI Bill is not the same as what they got after WW2.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> I recognize what the whites have done. I never mentioned reparations for whites on the Underground Railroad, not sure where that came from.I also look at the big picture of everyone involved in the chain of harm. You and the other that I was posting to, don’t or you chose to ignore it. You assume that you are the only person that has done homework and you want to say you are the only one that understands the situation and claim your authority of the situation. That is completely arrogant, self serving and categorically wrong.
> 
> No reparations for slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was not talking just about you. I don't assume a damn thing. You have not done the homework if you don't think reparations are warranted. And you definitely haven't done your homework if you keep saying no reparations for slavery since reparations are not just for slavery. So if we don't get reparations for slavery we still are owed for the human rights violations caused by the system of apartheid in America that lasted by written law from 1776 until at least 1965.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have done plenty of homework. We have different views on the issue. You stand by yours, I stand by mine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Fair enough, but your view has no validity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your view has no validity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Between us, my view is the one that has all the validity.
Click to expand...

Enjoy your day.


----------



## irosie91

IM2 said:


> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery




your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
Africa------became muslims)


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery


Yes they did.


----------



## dave p

irosie91 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
Click to expand...

People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.


----------



## irosie91

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they did.
Click to expand...


nope------they sold people from  OTHER TRIBES -------not their cousins over there,   next door


----------



## irosie91

dave p said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.
Click to expand...


Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot


----------



## dave p

irosie91 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
Click to expand...

Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?


----------



## irosie91

dave p said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?
Click to expand...


its STUPID.     "person of color"   now includes lots and lots of people who used to be  CAUCASION but are JUMPING on a bandwagon of ENTITLEMENT.


----------



## dave p

irosie91 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> its STUPID.     "person of color"   now includes lots and lots of people who used to be  CAUCASION but are JUMPING on a bandwagon of ENTITLEMENT.
Click to expand...

It isn’t stupid. It is how some blacks and others refer to themselves. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it isn’t valid.


----------



## IM2

irosie91 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
Click to expand...


Lean to read Irosie. The arab trader argument is not part of this discussion.


----------



## IM2

irosie91 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> its STUPID.     "person of color"   now includes lots and lots of people who used to be  CAUCASION but are JUMPING on a bandwagon of ENTITLEMENT.
Click to expand...


The way you guys try twisting and turning things is hilarious. People of color include no Caucasians.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they did.
Click to expand...


Not entirely true and this is not the only account of how things happened.


----------



## Uncensored2008

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?



That needs to be negotiated.

Have each slave prepare an estimate of the lost wages they incurred. We can provide help in preparing the financial statements for any ex-slave who needs such help.

Present the estimate in person and it will be considered on a case by case basis.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?
Click to expand...


Many blacks don't say shit. You don't know many blacks. I do know many blacks.


----------



## irosie91

IM2 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lean to read Irosie. The arab trader argument is not part of this discussion.
Click to expand...


I read fine---------the slave trade from sub-Saharan Africa to the REST OF THE WORLD   has been an  ARAB ENTERPRISE for at least 4000 years.      The SUDAN  is an ARAB COLONY    founded as an outpost of Arabia for the PURPOSE OF THE CONDUCT OF SLAVE TRADE.    The phenomenon is
addressed in the   OT-------ISHMAELITE SLAVE TRADERS-----bought and sold Joseph.        Ishmaelite-----was a word designating   NOMADS---
ILLITERATE,   UNWASHED and sorta criminal.      It is a very old designation
for what were largely   ARABS.    Black slaves were EXPORTED from Africa to places as far as India


----------



## IM2

Uncensored2008 said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That needs to be negotiated.
> 
> Have each slave prepare an estimate of the lost wages they incurred. We can provide help in preparing the financial statements for any ex-slave who needs such help.
> 
> Present the estimate in person and it will be considered on a case by case basis.
Click to expand...


No. It's just that simple. No.


----------



## Uncensored2008

IM2 said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That needs to be negotiated.
> 
> Have each slave prepare an estimate of the lost wages they incurred. We can provide help in preparing the financial statements for any ex-slave who needs such help.
> 
> Present the estimate in person and it will be considered on a case by case basis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. It's just that simple. No.
Click to expand...


If you want free money, that is the basis.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Many blacks don't say shit. You don't know many blacks. I do know many blacks.
Click to expand...

I know many blacks, quite a few are  friends as well. Don’t assume.


----------



## irosie91

IM2 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> 
> 
> People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> its STUPID.     "person of color"   now includes lots and lots of people who used to be  CAUCASION but are JUMPING on a bandwagon of ENTITLEMENT.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The way you guys try twisting and turning things is hilarious. People of color include no Caucasians.
Click to expand...


most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave


----------



## dave p

irosie91 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> its STUPID.     "person of color"   now includes lots and lots of people who used to be  CAUCASION but are JUMPING on a bandwagon of ENTITLEMENT.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The way you guys try twisting and turning things is hilarious. People of color include no Caucasians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
> caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
> CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave
Click to expand...

I don’t care what he does in his grave.


----------



## Uncensored2008

irosie91 said:


> [
> 
> most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
> caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
> CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave



Never try to tell an Iranian they are Arab.

Persians are most definitely white. "Aryan" is the Farsi word for "Iranian."


----------



## irosie91

dave p said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
> 
> 
> 
> Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> its STUPID.     "person of color"   now includes lots and lots of people who used to be  CAUCASION but are JUMPING on a bandwagon of ENTITLEMENT.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The way you guys try twisting and turning things is hilarious. People of color include no Caucasians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
> caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
> CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t care what he does in his grave.
Click to expand...


good point------he has a right to privacy


----------



## irosie91

Uncensored2008 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
> caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
> CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never try to tell an Iranian they are Arab.
> 
> Persians are most definitely white. "Aryan" is the Farsi word for "Iranian."
Click to expand...


Never try to suggest   ARAB FOOD to an Iranian,     Never admire Arabian
music in the presence of an Iranian.    Never ask an Iranian muslim if he knows Arabic------He might VOMIT


----------



## Uncensored2008

irosie91 said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
> caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
> CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never try to tell an Iranian they are Arab.
> 
> Persians are most definitely white. "Aryan" is the Farsi word for "Iranian."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Never try to suggest   ARAB FOOD to an Iranian,     Never admire Arabian
> music in the presence of an Iranian.    Never ask an Iranian muslim if he knows Arabic------He might VOMIT
Click to expand...



Sadly, Iran is over-run by Arabs and the Persian population is dwindling. In another 20 years it will be just another Arab country.


----------



## irosie91

Uncensored2008 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
> caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
> CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never try to tell an Iranian they are Arab.
> 
> Persians are most definitely white. "Aryan" is the Farsi word for "Iranian."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Never try to suggest   ARAB FOOD to an Iranian,     Never admire Arabian
> music in the presence of an Iranian.    Never ask an Iranian muslim if he knows Arabic------He might VOMIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, Iran is over-run by Arabs and the Persian population is dwindling. In another 20 years it will be just another Arab country.
Click to expand...


no----Ethnic arabs are a small minority in Iran--------I do not believe that Iran is accepting hordes from Syria -------you got some other information on the topic?      Muslims are the majority---------are you referring to the DWINDLE of the ZOROASTRIANS?


----------



## Uncensored2008

irosie91 said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
> caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
> CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never try to tell an Iranian they are Arab.
> 
> Persians are most definitely white. "Aryan" is the Farsi word for "Iranian."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Never try to suggest   ARAB FOOD to an Iranian,     Never admire Arabian
> music in the presence of an Iranian.    Never ask an Iranian muslim if he knows Arabic------He might VOMIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, Iran is over-run by Arabs and the Persian population is dwindling. In another 20 years it will be just another Arab country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> no----Ethnic arabs are a small minority in Iran--------I do not believe that Iran is accepting hordes from Syria -------you got some other information on the topic?      Muslims are the majority---------are you referring to the DWINDLE of the ZOROASTRIANS?
Click to expand...



No, I know that Muslims are the majority, with the Christian population nearly wiped out.  Wiki says about 2% Arab. My understanding was the fall of Saddam had sent many Arabs from Iraq into Iran.


----------



## IM2

irosie91 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lean to read Irosie. The arab trader argument is not part of this discussion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read fine---------the slave trade from sub-Saharan Africa to the REST OF THE WORLD   has been an  ARAB ENTERPRISE for at least 4000 years.      The SUDAN  is an ARAB COLONY    founded as an outpost of Arabia for the PURPOSE OF THE CONDUCT OF SLAVE TRADE.    The phenomenon is
> addressed in the   OT-------ISHMAELITE SLAVE TRADERS-----bought and sold Joseph.        Ishmaelite-----was a word designating   NOMADS---
> ILLITERATE,   UNWASHED and sorta criminal.      It is a very old designation
> for what were largely   ARABS.    Black slaves were EXPORTED from Africa to places as far as India
Click to expand...


The Arabs had nothing to do with what happened here in America and I'm taking about what happened in its  entirety not the part you whites want leave out to continue arguing your infantile argument about who you didn't own . Fuck that. The Arab trader argument is not relevant to this discussion. You will keep bringing it up because you know you'll get help but it has nothing to do with America. Learn to read because I said nothing about whites imagining anything. I did say Africans have a side to this story whites refuse to accept.


----------



## irosie91

Uncensored2008 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
> caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
> CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never try to tell an Iranian they are Arab.
> 
> Persians are most definitely white. "Aryan" is the Farsi word for "Iranian."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Never try to suggest   ARAB FOOD to an Iranian,     Never admire Arabian
> music in the presence of an Iranian.    Never ask an Iranian muslim if he knows Arabic------He might VOMIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, Iran is over-run by Arabs and the Persian population is dwindling. In another 20 years it will be just another Arab country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> no----Ethnic arabs are a small minority in Iran--------I do not believe that Iran is accepting hordes from Syria -------you got some other information on the topic?      Muslims are the majority---------are you referring to the DWINDLE of the ZOROASTRIANS?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, I know that Muslims are the majority, with the Christian population nearly wiped out.  Wiki says about 2% Arab. My understanding was the fall of Saddam had sent many Arabs from Iraq into Iran.
Click to expand...


not as far as I know------THEY DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER


----------



## IM2

Uncensored2008 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That needs to be negotiated.
> 
> Have each slave prepare an estimate of the lost wages they incurred. We can provide help in preparing the financial statements for any ex-slave who needs such help.
> 
> Present the estimate in person and it will be considered on a case by case basis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. It's just that simple. No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you want free money, that is the basis.
Click to expand...


Since it's not free money, it's not the basis. It never has been the basis and it will not ever be the basis.


----------



## irosie91

IM2 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lean to read Irosie. The arab trader argument is not part of this discussion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read fine---------the slave trade from sub-Saharan Africa to the REST OF THE WORLD   has been an  ARAB ENTERPRISE for at least 4000 years.      The SUDAN  is an ARAB COLONY    founded as an outpost of Arabia for the PURPOSE OF THE CONDUCT OF SLAVE TRADE.    The phenomenon is
> addressed in the   OT-------ISHMAELITE SLAVE TRADERS-----bought and sold Joseph.        Ishmaelite-----was a word designating   NOMADS---
> ILLITERATE,   UNWASHED and sorta criminal.      It is a very old designation
> for what were largely   ARABS.    Black slaves were EXPORTED from Africa to places as far as India
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Arabs had nothing to do with what happened here in America and I'm taking about what happened in its  entirety not the part you whites want leave out to continue arguing your infantile argument about who you didn't own . Fuck that. The Arab trader argument is not relevant to this discussion. You will keep bringing it up because you know you'll get help but it has nothing to do with America. Learn to read because I said nothing about whites imagining anything. I did say Africans have a side to this story whites refuse to accept.
Click to expand...


wrong------arabs CONTROLLED  the African slave trade-------they had nothing to do with the  LARGE SCALE TRANSPORT to the Americas or what happened once that was accomplished-------but so far as Africans as slaves----arabs ALL BUT INVENTED IT.    Why does that fact IRK you---you prefer to believe that  blond blue eye Wasps captured black  children in the bush with butterfly nets?


----------



## Uncensored2008

irosie91 said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Never try to tell an Iranian they are Arab.
> 
> Persians are most definitely white. "Aryan" is the Farsi word for "Iranian."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never try to suggest   ARAB FOOD to an Iranian,     Never admire Arabian
> music in the presence of an Iranian.    Never ask an Iranian muslim if he knows Arabic------He might VOMIT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, Iran is over-run by Arabs and the Persian population is dwindling. In another 20 years it will be just another Arab country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> no----Ethnic arabs are a small minority in Iran--------I do not believe that Iran is accepting hordes from Syria -------you got some other information on the topic?      Muslims are the majority---------are you referring to the DWINDLE of the ZOROASTRIANS?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, I know that Muslims are the majority, with the Christian population nearly wiped out.  Wiki says about 2% Arab. My understanding was the fall of Saddam had sent many Arabs from Iraq into Iran.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> not as far as I know------THEY DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER
Click to expand...



True, but under Obama Iran was the darling and prospered economically due to the favoritism America showed them. It was an incentive for those who were in a failed state such as Iraq to seek refuge.


----------



## Uncensored2008

IM2 said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That needs to be negotiated.
> 
> Have each slave prepare an estimate of the lost wages they incurred. We can provide help in preparing the financial statements for any ex-slave who needs such help.
> 
> Present the estimate in person and it will be considered on a case by case basis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. It's just that simple. No.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you want free money, that is the basis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since it's not free money, it's not the basis. It never has been the basis and it will not ever be the basis.
Click to expand...



Well, you just hold your breath until someone hands you cash, bigot boi.


----------



## irosie91

Uncensored2008 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Never try to suggest   ARAB FOOD to an Iranian,     Never admire Arabian
> music in the presence of an Iranian.    Never ask an Iranian muslim if he knows Arabic------He might VOMIT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, Iran is over-run by Arabs and the Persian population is dwindling. In another 20 years it will be just another Arab country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> no----Ethnic arabs are a small minority in Iran--------I do not believe that Iran is accepting hordes from Syria -------you got some other information on the topic?      Muslims are the majority---------are you referring to the DWINDLE of the ZOROASTRIANS?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, I know that Muslims are the majority, with the Christian population nearly wiped out.  Wiki says about 2% Arab. My understanding was the fall of Saddam had sent many Arabs from Iraq into Iran.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> not as far as I know------THEY DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> True, but under Obama Iran was the darling and prospered economically due to the favoritism America showed them. It was an incentive for those who were in a failed state such as Iraq to seek refuge.
Click to expand...


you might be referring to the  SHIITE  majority in Iraq-------ok----but the RULING CLASS were SUNNIS------they would not migrate to Iran


----------



## Uncensored2008

irosie91 said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, Iran is over-run by Arabs and the Persian population is dwindling. In another 20 years it will be just another Arab country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no----Ethnic arabs are a small minority in Iran--------I do not believe that Iran is accepting hordes from Syria -------you got some other information on the topic?      Muslims are the majority---------are you referring to the DWINDLE of the ZOROASTRIANS?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, I know that Muslims are the majority, with the Christian population nearly wiped out.  Wiki says about 2% Arab. My understanding was the fall of Saddam had sent many Arabs from Iraq into Iran.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> not as far as I know------THEY DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> True, but under Obama Iran was the darling and prospered economically due to the favoritism America showed them. It was an incentive for those who were in a failed state such as Iraq to seek refuge.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you might be referring to the  SHIITE  majority in Iraq-------ok----but the RULING CLASS were SUNNIS------they would not migrate to Iran
Click to expand...



No question that those fleeing to Iran would be Shi'ite, but still ethnic Arab.


----------



## IM2

irosie91 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> People of color on the continent of Africa have been selling other people of color for thousands of years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> its STUPID.     "person of color"   now includes lots and lots of people who used to be  CAUCASION but are JUMPING on a bandwagon of ENTITLEMENT.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The way you guys try twisting and turning things is hilarious. People of color include no Caucasians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
> caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
> CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave
Click to expand...


You go tell your fellow whites an Iranian is white. Then you go tell your fellow whites that Alexandra Cortez is white. OK? Because the first thing you whites do when we talk about crime numbers after that stupid per capita shit is claim that Hispanics are added to whites and because of that whites have a higher number of crimes. Hispanics are not Caucasians them so you're just being disingenuous. Furthermore those considered Hispanic coming from the southern border are not Caucasians. They ae what were called Indians. Incas, Aztecs, Mayan, etc.


----------



## irosie91

Uncensored2008 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> no----Ethnic arabs are a small minority in Iran--------I do not believe that Iran is accepting hordes from Syria -------you got some other information on the topic?      Muslims are the majority---------are you referring to the DWINDLE of the ZOROASTRIANS?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I know that Muslims are the majority, with the Christian population nearly wiped out.  Wiki says about 2% Arab. My understanding was the fall of Saddam had sent many Arabs from Iraq into Iran.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> not as far as I know------THEY DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> True, but under Obama Iran was the darling and prospered economically due to the favoritism America showed them. It was an incentive for those who were in a failed state such as Iraq to seek refuge.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you might be referring to the  SHIITE  majority in Iraq-------ok----but the RULING CLASS were SUNNIS------they would not migrate to Iran
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No question that those fleeing to Iran would be Shi'ite, but still ethnic Arab.
Click to expand...


right----for Iranians----ALMOST GOOD-----if they are Shiites.   Even NUSKHARAH-ALLAH  is an arab.     Even Shiite arabs and Shiite Indians----
consider  IRAN   a kinda "holy land"    and Farsi----something like a  "holy language"


----------



## Uncensored2008

IM2 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other people   "OF COLOR"---------not their mothers.    ------of color???    the people who invented that idiotic designation of humanoids------should be shot
> 
> 
> 
> Because not all were black. Many black people say people of color. What’s your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> its STUPID.     "person of color"   now includes lots and lots of people who used to be  CAUCASION but are JUMPING on a bandwagon of ENTITLEMENT.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The way you guys try twisting and turning things is hilarious. People of color include no Caucasians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> most arabs are caucasion.      Never try to tell an IRANIAN  that he is not
> caucasion.     Persons native to INDIA are caucasion.   Linda Sarsour was
> CAUCASION  until she ;put a rag on her silly head.    Lots of Hispanics are MOSTLY causcasion------HERNAN CORTEZ  -------ancestor of millions was  CAUCASION.    Alexandria  Cortez is SUDDENLY  ---"A PERSON OF COLOR"-------Hernan is probably turning over in his grave
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You go tell your fellow whites an Iranian is white. Then you go tell your fellow whites that Alexandra Cortez is white. OK? Because the first thing you whites do when we talk about crime numbers after that stupid per capita shit is claim that Hispanics are added to whites and because of that whites have a higher number of crimes. Hispanics are not Caucasians them so you're just being disingenuous. Furthermore those considered Hispanic coming from the southern border are not Caucasians. They ae what were called Indians. Incas, Aztecs, Mayan, etc.
Click to expand...



DERP

"Hispanic" has to do with language, you ignorant racist,

Many Hispanics are white. 

Mexico is a Segregated nation, with White's on top and Indians on the bottom. Mestizos tend toward to lower echelons. Sinaloa has a massive population of white people of German descent, who founded and run the Pacifico/Corona brewery.

Leave the hood some time bigot boi, and see how other countries actually are.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

dave p said:


> If it is such a burning issue for you, implore the United Nations to get those foreign countries involved. Those countries participated and in fact helped produce slaves. Why not sue the families of those who owned salves? Try being honest and get everyone involved you think are perpetrators. I have not once insulted you or anyone else on the subject. You refuse To answer the basic of questions. You insist on the easy way out and only go after the U.S. Governmemt.
> 
> I don’t believe reparations should be paid period. You refuse to look at all contributors to what you feel is owed.


We already know that you and most others on this board don't believe that reparations *should *be paid.  No one is trying to change your mind or feelings.  What we are doing is telling you *how *they can be paid and presumably at some point, probably not during my lifetime, the United States will acknowledge this grievous injury that it inflicted upon an entire race of people *and their descendants *and make amends.

Also, not everything is about money.  If you were to look at this as similar to a party filing a legal claim, the plaintiff  or complaintant can ask the court to grant any or all of the following:

Depending on the facts of the case and the law of the *jurisdiction*, the forms of relief available to successful plaintiffs in civil lawsuits may include compensatory damages, *punitive damages*, declaratory and *injunctive relief*, and a court order requiring the *defendant* to *pay* the prevailing plaintiff's attorney fees​Injunctive relief can be an order from the court to compell a party to do a specific thing or refrain from doing a specific thing.  Many of the major strides made in civil rights began as a lawsuit.  As IM2 has already pointed out previously in this thread, Brown vs Board of Eduction was initiated to strike down the "separate but equal" doctrine and paved the way for the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  

*Brown v*. *Board of Education* of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), was a landmark United States Supreme Court *case* in which the Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional.​
The famous "Redtail" Tuskegee Airmen were not allowed to particpate in the second world war effort until a lawsuit forced the government to train them.  Then almost 20 years later, another lawsuit had to be filed before the first commercial airline would hire an African American pilot although no one could claim that they were not qualified.

You all talk shit about black people all day long, every damn day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year comparing us to every negative, demeaning and derogatory stereotype without ever considering that the people you're conversing with might not fit your stereotypes at all.  I don't know what any of you have accomplished in your lives but the way you present yourselves online, in this forum without an ounce of etiquette, decorum and in most cases civility is laughable because if anyone presents as a sterotypical racist that woudl be you all.  

Lastly, this is not a burning issue for me that needs to be taken up with the United Nations.  I and others have other more immediate needs that need to be addressed.  I am somewhat surprised though, although I guess I shouldn't be, that you all haven't figured out yet why we're here.


----------



## irosie91

you have no case.     Irish people have a better case


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Coyote said:


> My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents...and in a sense reparations have already been made through affirmative action legislation.


Affirmative action doesn't compensate anyone for any harm done to them prior to the passage of our current civil rights legislation.  In short in codifies discriminatory hiring, firing, promotion, etc. practices in employment at the federal level and creates a private cause of action which the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has authority to investigate.  In some of the most egregious cases the EEOC may bring suit on behalf of the complaintant.  And contrary to popular belief it doesn't elevate "unqualifed" black people over "qualified" white people.  In fact the law itself is race neutral.  Companies were instructed to

"take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin.​White women have benefited more than any other group as a result of this legislation.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Coyote said:


> Who gets reparations?


All blacks?
Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
*What's wrong with starting with those who can trace their ancestry to a specific planation or sale*
Those who immigrated here post slavery?
What is black? Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere? 50%....100%....
What is white?
What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
*The government would be the proper party to pay reparations because the whites involved in the institution of chattel slavery would not have been able to do so but for the racist laws that our governments created, protected and enforced.*
How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?
*Not to discount their participation or the risks that they took but there were no laws requiring them to do anything unlike the laws that required black people be kept in captivity and returned to captivity if they managed to escape.*


----------



## dave p

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it is such a burning issue for you, implore the United Nations to get those foreign countries involved. Those countries participated and in fact helped produce slaves. Why not sue the families of those who owned salves? Try being honest and get everyone involved you think are perpetrators. I have not once insulted you or anyone else on the subject. You refuse To answer the basic of questions. You insist on the easy way out and only go after the U.S. Governmemt.
> 
> I don’t believe reparations should be paid period. You refuse to look at all contributors to what you feel is owed.
> 
> 
> 
> We already know that you and most others on this board don't believe that reparations *should *be paid.  No one is trying to change your mind or feelings.  What we are doing is telling you *how *they can be paid and presumably at some point, probably not during my lifetime, the United States will acknowledge this grievous injury that it inflicted upon an entire race of people *and their descendants *and make amends.
> 
> Also, not everything is about money.  If you were to look at this as similar to a party filing a legal claim, the plaintiff  or complaintant can ask the court to grant any or all of the following:
> 
> Depending on the facts of the case and the law of the *jurisdiction*, the forms of relief available to successful plaintiffs in civil lawsuits may include compensatory damages, *punitive damages*, declaratory and *injunctive relief*, and a court order requiring the *defendant* to *pay* the prevailing plaintiff's attorney fees​Injunctive relief can be an order from the court to compell a party to do a specific thing or refrain from doing a specific thing.  Many of the major strides made in civil rights began as a lawsuit.  As IM2 has already pointed out previously in this thread, Brown vs Board of Eduction was initiated to strike down the "separate but equal" doctrine and paved the way for the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
> 
> *Brown v*. *Board of Education* of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), was a landmark United States Supreme Court *case* in which the Court declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional.​
> The famous "Redtail" Tuskegee Airmen were not allowed to particpate in the second world war effort until a lawsuit forced the government to train them.  Then almost 20 years later, another lawsuit had to be filed before the first commercial airline would hire an African American pilot although no one could claim that they were not qualified.
> 
> You all talk shit about black people all day long, every damn day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year comparing us to every negative, demeaning and derogatory stereotype without ever considering that the people you're conversing with might not fit your stereotypes at all.  I don't know what any of you have accomplished in your lives but the way you present yourselves online, in this forum without an ounce of etiquette, decorum and in most cases civility is laughable because if anyone presents as a sterotypical racist that woudl be you all.
> 
> Lastly, this is not a burning issue for me that needs to be taken up with the United Nations.  I and others have other more immediate needs that need to be addressed.  I am somewhat surprised though, although I guess I shouldn't be, that you all haven't figured out yet why we're here.
Click to expand...

I don’t talk about Black vs White every day because it isn’t an issue for me.It does however appear that it is for you though. My life is quite full. You have your views, I have mine. We will never convince each other. That’s what is nice about society that accepts different views


----------



## Coyote

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who gets reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> All blacks?
> Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
> *What's wrong with starting with those who can trace their ancestry to a specific planation or sale*
> Those who immigrated here post slavery?
> What is black? Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere? 50%....100%....
> What is white?
> What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
> *The government pays because the whites involved in the institution of chattel slavery would not have been able to do so but for the racist laws that they created and the government enforced.*
> How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?
> *Not to discount their participation or the risks that they took but there were no laws requiring them to do anything unlike the laws that required black people be kept in captivity and returned to captivity if they managed to escape.*
Click to expand...

If the government pays it means I pay.

Isn’t affirmative action a form of reparation innacted by the government?


----------



## Coyote

I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.

Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

irosie91 said:


> the breeding and selling of human beings......??????


That's is actually accurate.  The slaves were considered chattel, no different that the slave owners livestock, to be bred in order to increase his slave holdings.  Some of the owners fathered the children themselves.


----------



## irosie91

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> the breeding and selling of human beings......??????
> 
> 
> 
> That's is actually accurate.  The slaves were considered chattel, no different that the slave owners livestock, to be bred in order to increase his slave holdings.  Some of the owners fathered the children themselves.
Click to expand...


read it again----the POSTER said that the practice of  BREEDING SLAVES is an ONGOING PRACTICE----ie NOW.      As to how ACCURATE AND PREVALENT was purposeful   BREEDING   ----try not to engage in wishful
thinking  --------  I doubt that such a practice was THE THING----on the 
TARA plantation


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Coyote said:


> If the government pays it means I pay.
> Isn’t affirmative action a form of reparation innacted by the government?


If you're speaking strictly of taxes, we ALL pay for things that we don't want and some of us don't get.  Or for things that are used to violate our rights.

On what specific grounds do you feel that any money received by the government through it's normal channgels should not be spent on reparations?  And no, affirmative action is not a reparation.  For some strange reason they had to spell it out in our laws that racial discrimination is bad and was now a violation of a specific law that allowed the injured party a private cause of action after exhausting all of their administrative remedies.  I addressed this a little while ago in a separate post, you must have missed it.


----------



## Coyote

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents...and in a sense reparations have already been made through affirmative action legislation.
> 
> 
> 
> Affirmative action doesn't compensate anyone for any harm done to them prior to the passage of our current civil rights legislation.  In short in codifies discriminatory hiring, firing, promotion, etc. practices in employment at the federal level and creates a private cause of action which the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has authority to investigate.  In some of the most egregious cases the EEOC may bring suit on behalf of the complaintant.  And contrary to popular belief it doesn't elevate "unqualifed" black people over "qualified" white people.  In fact the law itself is race neutral.  Companies were instructed to
> 
> "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin.​White women have benefited more than any other group as a result of this legislation.
Click to expand...

 Blacks have also benefited.  And no blacks alive today have been enslaved. No whites today have enslaved them.  You can’t just say the government should pay...we all fund it and paying for something I had no part in or would ever support is wrong also.

Reparations were made to the Japanese Americans interned during WW2, paid out to each survivor.  Not their descendents.  A public apology by Reagan representing the government.  In my opinion, that is just.


----------



## Coyote

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> If the government pays it means I pay.
> Isn’t affirmative action a form of reparation innacted by the government?
> 
> 
> 
> *If you're speaking strictly of taxes, we ALL pay for things that we don't want and some of us don't get.  Or for things that are used to violate our rights.*
> 
> On what specific grounds do you feel that any money received by the government through it's normal channgels should not be spent on reparations?  And no, affirmative action is not a reparation.  For some strange reason they had to spell it out in our laws that racial discrimination is bad and was now a violation of a specific law that allowed the injured party a private cause of action after exhausting all of their administrative remedies.  I addressed this a little while ago in a separate post, you must have missed it.
Click to expand...


Point taken.

Yes I responded before reading your post.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

irosie91 said:


> read it again----the POSTER said that the practice of BREEDING SLAVES is an ONGOING PRACTICE----ie NOW. As to how ACCURATE AND PREVALENT was purposeful BREEDING ----try not to engage in wishful
> thinking -------- I doubt that such a practice was THE THING----on the
> TARA plantation


Do you need some smelling salts?  How about a fainting couch?


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Coyote said:


> Reparations were made to the Japanese Americans interned during WW2, paid out to each survivor. Not their descendents. A public apology by Reagan representing the government. In my opinion, that is just.


And those reparations should have been made along with the apology.  But what determines whether reparations should be paid is the harm that was done, not that our government managed to wait enough time til everyone who could come after it with a claim were all dead.  The harm didn't die with them, it was perpetuated for centuries through our government's racist and discriminatory laws and court rulings.  And the damage is still being incurred though not in the volume that it had previuosly but still plenty enough for us to know that the problems have not cured.


----------



## irosie91

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> read it again----the POSTER said that the practice of BREEDING SLAVES is an ONGOING PRACTICE----ie NOW. As to how ACCURATE AND PREVALENT was purposeful BREEDING ----try not to engage in wishful
> thinking -------- I doubt that such a practice was THE THING----on the
> TARA plantation
> 
> 
> 
> Do you need some smelling salts?  How about a fainting couch?
Click to expand...


about what are you babbling??


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who gets reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> All blacks?
> Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
> *What's wrong with starting with those who can trace their ancestry to a specific planation or sale*
> Those who immigrated here post slavery?
> What is black? Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere? 50%....100%....
> What is white?
> What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
> *The government pays because the whites involved in the institution of chattel slavery would not have been able to do so but for the racist laws that they created and the government enforced.*
> How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?
> *Not to discount their participation or the risks that they took but there were no laws requiring them to do anything unlike the laws that required black people be kept in captivity and returned to captivity if they managed to escape.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If the government pays it means I pay.
> 
> Isn’t affirmative action a form of reparation innacted by the government?
Click to expand...




NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reparations were made to the Japanese Americans interned during WW2, paid out to each survivor. Not their descendents. A public apology by Reagan representing the government. In my opinion, that is just.
> 
> 
> 
> And those reparations should have been made along with the apology.  But what determines whether reparations should be paid is the harm that was done, not that our government managed to wait enough time til everyone who could come after it with a claim were all dead.  The harm didn't die with them, it was perpetuated for centuries through our government's racist and discriminatory laws and court rulings.  And the damage is still being incurred though not in the volume that it had previuosly but still plenty enough for us to know that the problems have not cured.
Click to expand...

there are plenty of reparations already in place. No more are needed.


----------



## yiostheoy

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?


Reparations.

Funny.

No free money for negroes.

They are not native americans.


----------



## yiostheoy

Every negro who want a free boat trip back to Africa should be entitled to this.


----------



## yiostheoy

If this reparations talk for blacks continues then the far right is likely to make them all swim back to Africa.


----------



## yiostheoy

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a piece I found.
> How America Should Pay Reparations
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.  There are good points there, but leaves it up to individuals to determine their qualification, and to determine the amount acceptable to each.  At least once (that I know of), such a program of reparation has been implemented and paid for: Black Farmers to Receive Payouts in $1.2 Billion from Federal Lawsuit.  It was fraught with fraud and abuse and left too many legitimate claimants unrewarded.
> I'm actually looking for your calculations and how you determine them.  Do you not consider the myriad of other programs, like Affirmative Action, that addressed past discrimination, to have been at least partially helpful?
Click to expand...

You are as stupid as the day is long and hot.


----------



## yiostheoy

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've seen, the posters on this site that support reparations do so for more than just slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> There is case for that as well but we are only discussing slavery. We know that laws and policies were implemented to cheat and hold Blacks back like share cropping, vagrancy laws, Black codes, red lining, loan denial etc etc etc  but those are not part of the discussion now.
Click to expand...

That was just Southern politics as usual.

Nobody wanted blackie (1) to have a gun, (2) to have a farm, (3) to have a job.

Sort of the same way the Mexican illegal immigrants are being treated now.

There is no new thing under the sun.


----------



## IM2

yiostheoy said:


> If this reparations talk for blacks continues then the far right is likely to make them all swim back to Africa.



I don't think so. It might be the end of the far right if they were to even think about something like that. I'd like to see a right winger try making someone like Mike Tyson swim anywhere. I'd pay big money to see that.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who gets reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> All blacks?
> Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
> *What's wrong with starting with those who can trace their ancestry to a specific planation or sale*
> Those who immigrated here post slavery?
> What is black? Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere? 50%....100%....
> What is white?
> What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
> *The government pays because the whites involved in the institution of chattel slavery would not have been able to do so but for the racist laws that they created and the government enforced.*
> How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?
> *Not to discount their participation or the risks that they took but there were no laws requiring them to do anything unlike the laws that required black people be kept in captivity and returned to captivity if they managed to escape.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If the government pays it means I pay.
> 
> Isn’t affirmative action a form of reparation innacted by the government?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reparations were made to the Japanese Americans interned during WW2, paid out to each survivor. Not their descendents. A public apology by Reagan representing the government. In my opinion, that is just.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And those reparations should have been made along with the apology.  But what determines whether reparations should be paid is the harm that was done, not that our government managed to wait enough time til everyone who could come after it with a claim were all dead.  The harm didn't die with them, it was perpetuated for centuries through our government's racist and discriminatory laws and court rulings.  And the damage is still being incurred though not in the volume that it had previuosly but still plenty enough for us to know that the problems have not cured.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> there are plenty of reparations already in place. No more are needed.
Click to expand...


No, there are no reparations in place. Not for blacks.


----------



## IM2

yiostheoy said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> Reparations.
> 
> Funny.
> 
> No free money for negroes.
> 
> They are not native americans.
Click to expand...


Explain the legal basis on which your argument is supported.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who gets reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> All blacks?
> Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
> *What's wrong with starting with those who can trace their ancestry to a specific planation or sale*
> Those who immigrated here post slavery?
> What is black? Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere? 50%....100%....
> What is white?
> What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
> *The government pays because the whites involved in the institution of chattel slavery would not have been able to do so but for the racist laws that they created and the government enforced.*
> How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?
> *Not to discount their participation or the risks that they took but there were no laws requiring them to do anything unlike the laws that required black people be kept in captivity and returned to captivity if they managed to escape.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If the government pays it means I pay.
> 
> Isn’t affirmative action a form of reparation innacted by the government?
Click to expand...


No.


----------



## Cellblock2429

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?


/——/ Any survivors of slavery should get $1,000,000 paid by those who held them in slavery. Now line them up and lets get it over with.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.



Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.


----------



## IM2

Cellblock2429 said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> /——/ Any survivors of slavery should get $1,000,000 paid by those who held them in slavery. Now line them up and lets get it over with.
Click to expand...


More dumb whiteness.


----------



## karpenter

How Much Reparations
Will Have To Be Paid Out To Your Descendants
And Their Descendents
On And On And On.....

Are You Going To Clean-Up And Rebuild
The 'Urban Prairies' You Left Across Our Cities ??
Reimburse For All The Properties
You've Burned And Looted ??


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents...and in a sense reparations have already been made through affirmative action legislation.
> 
> 
> 
> Affirmative action doesn't compensate anyone for any harm done to them prior to the passage of our current civil rights legislation.  In short in codifies discriminatory hiring, firing, promotion, etc. practices in employment at the federal level and creates a private cause of action which the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has authority to investigate.  In some of the most egregious cases the EEOC may bring suit on behalf of the complaintant.  And contrary to popular belief it doesn't elevate "unqualifed" black people over "qualified" white people.  In fact the law itself is race neutral.  Companies were instructed to
> 
> "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin.​White women have benefited more than any other group as a result of this legislation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Blacks have also benefited.  And no blacks alive today have been enslaved. No whites today have enslaved them.  You can’t just say the government should pay...we all fund it and paying for something I had no part in or would ever support is wrong also.
> 
> Reparations were made to the Japanese Americans interned during WW2, paid out to each survivor.  Not their descendents.  A public apology by Reagan representing the government.  In my opinion, that is just.
Click to expand...


Yes we can say the government will pay just as the Native Americans did in the Cobell case to name just one. You have paid for wars you did not participate in as well as many other things so your argument in opposition really is very weak.


----------



## IM2

karpenter said:


> How Much Reparations
> Will Have To Be Paid Out To Your Descendants
> And Their Descendents
> On And On And On.....
> 
> Are You Going To Clean-Up And Rebuild
> The 'Urban Prairies' You Left Across Our Cities ??
> Reimburse For All The Properties
> You've Burned And Looted ??



More dumb whiteness.


----------



## Cellblock2429

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
Click to expand...

/——-/ 60 years of welfare, food stamps and housing for those who didn’t spend one second in bondage paid by those who never held slaves.


----------



## IM2

Cellblock2429 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——-/ 60 years of welfare, food stamps and housing for those who didn’t spend one second in bondage paid by those who never held slaves.
Click to expand...


----------



## Cellblock2429

IM2 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——-/ 60 years of welfare, food stamps and housing for those who didn’t spend one second in bondage paid by those who never held slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

/——/ Said no White person ever.,


----------



## IM2

Cellblock2429 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——-/ 60 years of welfare, food stamps and housing for those who didn’t spend one second in bondage paid by those who never held slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
Click to expand...


Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.


----------



## Cellblock2429

IM2 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——-/ 60 years of welfare, food stamps and housing for those who didn’t spend one second in bondage paid by those who never held slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.
Click to expand...

/—-/ Proof please.


IM2 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——-/ 60 years of welfare, food stamps and housing for those who didn’t spend one second in bondage paid by those who never held slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.
Click to expand...

/——/ Apparently your ancestors in Africa sold their neighbors into slavery. You need to pay reparations.


----------



## Cellblock2429

IM2 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> /——/ Any survivors of slavery should get $1,000,000 paid by those who held them in slavery. Now line them up and lets get it over with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More dumb whiteness.
Click to expand...

/——-/ you need to pay reparations to all Whites who were robbed by Blacks since 1865


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
Click to expand...

That is not reparations.


----------



## Coyote

Kjcv


Cellblock2429 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> /——/ Any survivors of slavery should get $1,000,000 paid by those who held them in slavery. Now line them up and lets get it over with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More dumb whiteness.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——-/ you need to pay reparations to all Whites who were robbed by Blacks since 1865
Click to expand...

And all blacks who were robbed by whites.


----------



## Coyote

karpenter said:


> How Much Reparations
> Will Have To Be Paid Out To Your Descendants
> And Their Descendents
> On And On And On.....
> 
> Are You Going To Clean-Up And Rebuild
> The 'Urban Prairies' You Left Across Our Cities ??
> Reimburse For All The Properties
> You've Burned And Looted ??


Only if you do.

Racist canards.


----------



## karpenter

IM2 said:
			
		

> More dumb whiteness.


That Young Man In Video I Posted
Has A Lot More To Say Than Race War
Sit Through It. Listen To What Else He Has To Say
He Speaking To Those Like You

Because You're As Dumb As They Come


----------



## MaryL

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?


Wholesale, or retail? Well, based on inflation over the monetarily cost of the  lives men that fought and died to  free the slaves/  the number of ex slaves still alive from that era= $0.00. That's my best estimate. Sorry kids, no reparations for YOU.


----------



## Coyote

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reparations were made to the Japanese Americans interned during WW2, paid out to each survivor. Not their descendents. A public apology by Reagan representing the government. In my opinion, that is just.
> 
> 
> 
> And those reparations should have been made along with the apology.  But what determines whether reparations should be paid is the harm that was done, not that our government managed to wait enough time til everyone who could come after it with a claim were all dead.  The harm didn't die with them, it was perpetuated for centuries through our government's racist and discriminatory laws and court rulings.  And the damage is still being incurred though not in the volume that it had previuosly but still plenty enough for us to know that the problems have not cured.
Click to expand...


The harm that was done to survivers, not their descendents.  You would have a legitimate case for reparations to be made to the survivors of the Tuskegee Syphilus study, that was a specific injury and injustice to a specific group of people and there is no ambiguity about harm done, who to and who by.  Like reparations to the survivors of internment.


----------



## karpenter

karpenter said:
			
		

> How Much Reparations
> Will Have To Be Paid Out To Your Descendants
> And Their Descendents
> On And On And On.....





			
				Coyote said:
			
		

> Racist canards.


Is That Un-Canarded Enough
For You To Answer The Honest Question Now ??


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews came here after WWII, poor as dirt.
> No excuse.
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people for the most part are not of "African descent".  In other words, they're not black therefore they are not a part of the designated class whose rights were legislated away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell that to Hitler and Stalin.
> Jews value education above welfare.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews are not a race. You do understand that the case that ended segregation was fought by blacks over education don't you? When will whites like you stop lying to yourself?
Click to expand...

Jews are members of a religion...Hitler and Stalin believed otherwise.
If you have an issue with that, feel free to attend a seance and take it up with them.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ridgerunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> All of his arguments are disconnected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is disconnected, dave p...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He’s something. Not sure if it’s animal vegetable or mineral. But whatever it is, it isn’t smart!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The chickenshit that has me on ignore because he's too scared to debate says what?
Click to expand...

It's actually because you're an idiot.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
Click to expand...

Your ancestors sold family members; you can't handle that?  Tough.
You've had equal rights since the 1960s and you still can't live without going to the bar and getting a daily dose of under the panties satisfaction.
If you can't straighten out your act don't expect others to give you hand outs that you''ll simply spend on clothes and use to upgrade from BMWs to Roll Royces.


----------



## TNHarley

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> The value of lost wages to a dead person is $0 USD
> 
> 
> 
> But their generational wealth has value to their descendants.
Click to expand...

How can you prove there would be any wealth?
Poor people that come from nothing do good shit for themselves all the time.
Some black people owned slaves. How much do their black descendents deserve to hand out? Do they get money back? 
You going to dna test every black in america?
This shit is so ridiculous dude.


----------



## MizMolly

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s not an answer.
> 
> 
> 
> What is not an answer?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote the Law, not a post by another user.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The TNHarley quote is what I was responding to.  As I'm sure you know estate law is regulated at the state level so it varies from state to state
> 
> * LAST WAGES DUE DECEASED EMPLOYEE *
> Under certain circumstances, Tennessee law allows employers to pay to the surviving spouse or children (possible beneficiaries) of a deceased employee the last wages and other benefits due the deceased employee without a court order .
> 
> *30-2-103. Designation of beneficiary -- Wages and debts owed deceased employee.  *
> TN - Tennessee Code Annotated Tenn. Code Ann. § 30-2-103
> 
> Title 30 Administration of Estates > Chapter 2 Management, Settlement and Distribution > Part 1 Allowances to Family
> 
> (a) (1) An employee may designate a beneficiary to receive payment for any wages or salary due such employee at the time of the employee's death. (2) The employer is encouraged to inform the employee of this right at the time the employee is hired. (3) If the employee fails to designate such beneficiary as provided for in subdivision (a)(1), the employer shall pay out such wages and salary according to subsection (b). (b) (1) A sum not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) is authorized to be paid directly to the surviving spouse of a decedent, ...​In general
> 
> *Final paycheck issued after death*
> What do you do if an employee suddenly dies, and you still owe them wages? What you will do varies slightly depending on when you distribute the deceased employee wages.
> 
> In all cases, you will make the final payment to the employee’s beneficiary or estate. Have the beneficiary or estate representative complete Form W-9 so you have their information. It could take a while to receive the completed Form W-9 if the estate needs to obtain an employer identification number (EIN).
> 
> Once you receive the beneficiary’s or estate’s information, you will make the final paycheck out to the beneficiary or estate. You must report the gross amount on Form 1099-MISC in box 3. Use the information you received on Form W-9 to fill out IRS Form 1099-MISC.
> What to Do With Deceased Employee Wages​
Click to expand...

Did this law exist back then?


----------



## MizMolly

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Slavery ended over 150 years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Slavery was abolished by the 13th Amendment in 1865 yet for the next 99+ years until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act in 1965 and the Fair Housing Act in 1968 people of African descent were still legislatively regulated to second class citizenry under the separate but most definitely not equal doctrine.
> 
> You all do understand the concept of something being culmulative with the damages building upon previous damages all causing additional harm correct?
> 
> If as a black person I'm required to pay the same amount in taxes as you a white person, but all I'm receiving is 40% of the benefits & services being a tax paying member of society entails while whites are receiving 100% of the benefits and services, how is that equitable, particularly if it's written into law and has been adjudicated by our courts?  These are damages that are quantifiable so what's with the pretense?
Click to expand...

Women were treated like second class citizens, no reparations due, life goes on.


----------



## MizMolly

IM2 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BuckToothMoron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> Completely untrue.  Wages owed at the time of death are still owed to the decedant's estate or benficiary.
> 
> 
> 
> And am asking about wages owed at the time of death of someone held as a slave in the US at the time of his/her death, plus interest.  Part of the question addresses how much interest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If a descendant of a slave wants to recover lost wages he should track down the descendants of the slave owner and sue for the back pay with interest. I never owned a slave, I am against slavery and I am not going to pay the price for the sins of others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No he should take the case to the government and sue for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop begging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whites have begged now for 242 years.
Click to expand...

Proof?


----------



## MizMolly

IM2 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> _And that’s just the 20th century. If you go beyond that—to include all stolen income from the revolution to secession—the balance falls deep into the red. In 1860, translated to today’s terms, slaves represented a staggering $10 trillion in wealth, an incredible sum. If you include compound interest—to represent the compounding plunder of the next century—you are left with an implausibly large amount of money._
> 
> Adjusting for inflation and then compounding interest?
> 
> Holy double-counting Batman!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Considering he was counting what happened after slavery and did leave out the years from 1641 unril1776 when blacks were slaves you really have nothing to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Considering he was counting what happened after slavery *
> 
> Adjust for inflation or use compound interest, don't do both, idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well he did it. If you have a problem with it, you have his name. Man up, go to him and bitch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I have a problem with his terrible math?
> He's never going to see a dollar of reparations either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His math is fine.  And like I said, you can talk all your white boy bolo bullshit about what you're not going to pay, but the day will come that you will pay. No you won't pay reparations but when that payment is due, you will wish you had. Pray that you are not alive when that day comes.
Click to expand...

You never elaborate on what that means, threats?


----------



## MizMolly

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.
> 
> 
> 
> But it would be the US government paying the reparations.
Click to expand...

With what money?


----------



## MizMolly

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I oppose reparations, for many reasons, but among them is that I strongly disagree with group punishment or punishing people for the actions of their ancestors. It is like punishing the children of illegal immigrants for the actions of their parents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This argument ignores the continued suffering we face because of what ancestors did, what parents did, and what these generations are doing. The crimes did not  stop coyote, that's the major fallacy many whites base their arguments on. Your comparison is not even close. C'mon man, Donald Trump and others still exist today and they practiced racism and still do yet you argue like it all just stopped. You read the posts from people in this section. They own businesses, manage business, they are police officers, bankers, real estate agents, teachers and work in all fields yet you believe these things ended and these guys are not responsible for the continuing suffering we as blacks endure.
Click to expand...

How has Donald Trump held you back?


----------



## MizMolly

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> My feeling is reparations are made to survivors not descendents.
> 
> 
> 
> Why? The descendants of those who died as a result or died without having generational wealth also bear the costs. Descendants of those who perish due to criminal neglect or criminal activity are often awarded damages in our justice system.
Click to expand...

You cannot have justice for slavery by todays standards. The times have changed, so have the laws.


----------



## MizMolly

IM2 said:


> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery





irosie91 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
Click to expand...

Supposedly only whites lie about history, it appears the Africans dont want to admit their ancestors roles in slavery


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben




----------



## Indeependent

MizMolly said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s not an answer.
> 
> 
> 
> What is not an answer?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote the Law, not a post by another user.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The TNHarley quote is what I was responding to.  As I'm sure you know estate law is regulated at the state level so it varies from state to state
> 
> * LAST WAGES DUE DECEASED EMPLOYEE *
> Under certain circumstances, Tennessee law allows employers to pay to the surviving spouse or children (possible beneficiaries) of a deceased employee the last wages and other benefits due the deceased employee without a court order .
> 
> *30-2-103. Designation of beneficiary -- Wages and debts owed deceased employee.  *
> TN - Tennessee Code Annotated Tenn. Code Ann. § 30-2-103
> 
> Title 30 Administration of Estates > Chapter 2 Management, Settlement and Distribution > Part 1 Allowances to Family
> 
> (a) (1) An employee may designate a beneficiary to receive payment for any wages or salary due such employee at the time of the employee's death. (2) The employer is encouraged to inform the employee of this right at the time the employee is hired. (3) If the employee fails to designate such beneficiary as provided for in subdivision (a)(1), the employer shall pay out such wages and salary according to subsection (b). (b) (1) A sum not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) is authorized to be paid directly to the surviving spouse of a decedent, ...​In general
> 
> *Final paycheck issued after death*
> What do you do if an employee suddenly dies, and you still owe them wages? What you will do varies slightly depending on when you distribute the deceased employee wages.
> 
> In all cases, you will make the final payment to the employee’s beneficiary or estate. Have the beneficiary or estate representative complete Form W-9 so you have their information. It could take a while to receive the completed Form W-9 if the estate needs to obtain an employer identification number (EIN).
> 
> Once you receive the beneficiary’s or estate’s information, you will make the final paycheck out to the beneficiary or estate. You must report the gross amount on Form 1099-MISC in box 3. Use the information you received on Form W-9 to fill out IRS Form 1099-MISC.
> What to Do With Deceased Employee Wages​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did this law exist back then?
Click to expand...

You mean a particular instance of a behavior coerced under a high number of conditions?


----------



## Indeependent

MizMolly said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Africans do have some say in telling us how things happened.  Many whites dismiss all African accounts of this or anything else pertaining to the history of the continent THEY have lived on. Things can only have happened as whites tell us they did.
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> your article offers NOTHING NEW or   "DIFFERENT"      From where did you get the idea that  "WHITE PEOPLE"  imagine that black Africans SOLD THEIR BROTHERS AND SISTERS.       As to the 'islamic'  influence on slave trade-----
> ACTUALLY   the arab influence on African slave trade goes back more than
> four thousand years-----------long before arabs  (including those hanging out in
> Africa------became muslims)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Supposedly only whites lie about history, it appears the Africans dont want to admit their ancestors roles in slavery
Click to expand...

I have a recommendation for how you can participate in a more meaningful relationship...
Look at any wall.
Talk to the wall.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Coyote said:


> Point taken.
> 
> Yes I responded before reading your post.


It's not an issue, I do the same thing myself on a fairly regular basis.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

IM2 said:


> My father served in WW2 and did not get these benefits. So me my and my brothers lives were affected by that loss of opportunity also. So many of you whites in here argue in opposition mindlessly unaware of how the laws and policies you don't want to, or are to scared to, discuss have benefited whites and created damage to black families and communities.


I'm sorry to hear of this.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your ancestors sold family members; you can't handle that?  Tough.
> You've had equal rights since the 1960s and you still can't live without going to the bar and getting a daily dose of under the panties satisfaction.
> If you can't straighten out your act don't expect others to give you hand outs that you''ll simply spend on clothes and use to upgrade from BMWs to Roll Royces.
Click to expand...


Since none of that happened you just show yourself to be another dumb white person.


----------



## irosie91

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your ancestors sold family members; you can't handle that?  Tough.
> You've had equal rights since the 1960s and you still can't live without going to the bar and getting a daily dose of under the panties satisfaction.
> If you can't straighten out your act don't expect others to give you hand outs that you''ll simply spend on clothes and use to upgrade from BMWs to Roll Royces.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since none of that happened you just show yourself to be another dumb white person.
Click to expand...


none of what happened?    -----I am not going to address the "selling family members"-------if it did happen----it was, likely, rare.    But it is a fact that black African tribes did SELL  other blacks for several thousand years. -----because black Africans are just as perverse as are "white"  people and slavery was UBIQUITOUS thruout the world.     It is also a fact that it is not a UNIQUELY black experience.     It would be impossible to know WHERE TO BEGIN to try to compensate all the victims of injustice over the past 5000 years.     Talk to a person from south east asia-------they are convinced that the BRITISH EMPIRE  is still contaminating their blood and tea cups


----------



## BlackSand

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?



Free housing provided by the master.
Free food provided by the master.
Free healthcare provided by the master.
Unfavorable working conditions.

There's some stupid folks currently fighting pretty hard to bring slavery back ... 

.​


----------



## IM2

Cellblock2429 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> /——-/ 60 years of welfare, food stamps and housing for those who didn’t spend one second in bondage paid by those who never held slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /—-/ Proof please.
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——-/ 60 years of welfare, food stamps and housing for those who didn’t spend one second in bondage paid by those who never held slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Apparently your ancestors in Africa sold their neighbors into slavery. You need to pay reparations.
Click to expand...


No I do not. You are just another dumb white who knows nothing about what went on repeatimg a half truth and are. just running your mouth.


----------



## IM2

irosie91 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your ancestors sold family members; you can't handle that?  Tough.
> You've had equal rights since the 1960s and you still can't live without going to the bar and getting a daily dose of under the panties satisfaction.
> If you can't straighten out your act don't expect others to give you hand outs that you''ll simply spend on clothes and use to upgrade from BMWs to Roll Royces.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since none of that happened you just show yourself to be another dumb white person.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> none of what happened?    -----I am not going to address the "selling family members"-------if it did happen----it was, likely, rare.    But it is a fact that black African tribes did SELL  other blacks for several thousand years. -----because black Africans are just as perverse as are "white"  people and slavery was UBIQUITOUS thruout the world.     It is also a fact that it is not a UNIQUELY black experience.     It would be impossible to know WHERE TO BEGIN to try to compensate all the victims of injustice over the past 5000 years.     Talk to a person from south east asia-------they are convinced that the BRITISH EMPIRE  is still contaminating their blood and tea cups
Click to expand...


These words you posted are not exactly facts.


----------



## irosie91

BlackSand said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free housing provided by the master.
> Free food provided by the master.
> Free healthcare provided by the master.
> Unfavorable working conditions.
> 
> There's some stupid folks currently fighting pretty hard to bring slavery back ...
> 
> .​
Click to expand...


you are UNFORTUNATELY right------but it is not Trump and his minions----it is the  "NOBLE SOCIALISTS"     who actively and SELF RIGHTEOUSLY  seek this miserable outcome.  -------the first step towards disaster is big, giant,  government subsidized housing.     Such projects ----historically --descend into lairs of crime.     HISTORY-------which is one of the reasons I do not INSIST on   KEEPING FAMILIES BEING DETAINED at the southern border intact.     "INTACT"  where? -------giant hotels?   Just stick anybody and everyone in some GIANT HOTEL with separate accommodations for families?  -------idle non paying people?     ----THINK CRIME


----------



## IM2

*Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade*
By Dwayne Wong (Omowale)

There are many misconceptions about African history and nowhere is this more true than the topic of the slave trade. Very often I see comments by people who argue that Africans sold each other into slavery. There is some element of truth to this, but to speak of the slave trade solely as Africans selling each other t is a gross oversimplification of what was a complex historical event. *This also seems to be an attempt to shift the burden of the slave trade on the victims of that very trade. In How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Walter Rodney mentions how the white author of a book on the slave trade admitted that he was encouraged by other scholars to blame the slave trade solely on the Africans. This narrative helps to lessen European guilt by making Africans seem just as or even more guilty of being involved in the slave trade.* This piece is not an attempt to ignore the African role in the slave trade or to absolve those that were involved, but to to provide a more complete picture of the African involvement in slave trade.

*In the first place, the Portuguese initiated what eventually became the Trans-Atlantic slave trade mainly through slave raids along the coasts of Africa. The first of these raids came in 1444 and was led by Lançarote de Freitas. The problem with raiding for slaves was that it was extremely dangerous. For instance, the slave trader Nuno Tristão was killed during an ambush. Slave raiding proved to be an extremely dangerous way to obtain slaves, but buying slaves was much safer and took less effort on the part of the Europeans. Therefore, the first phase of the slave trade began not with a trade, but with a series of raids. This point is especially important because although the slave trade was on some levels based on a partnership between European buyers and African traders, the slave trade did not begin as such.*

*Moreover, the partnership between the traders and buyers was an uneasy one. The European slave traders often betrayed those who supplied them with slaves. A famous case of this was the African slave trader Daaga who was tricked and captured by slave traders. He was taken to Trinidad where he would eventually lead a mutiny. Another example is given by Anne Bailey in her book African Voices in the Atlantic Slave Trade. She mentions the story of Chief Ndorkutsu who had been providing captives to the European traders. Eventually some of the Ndorkutsu’s own relatives were tricked into boarding a slave ship and then taken as slaves to Cuba. In some cases, such as that of Madam Tinubu in Nigeria and Afonso of the Kongo Kingdom, those Africans that initially gave African captives to the Europeans came to resist the slave trade. Tinubu had a change of heart when she realized how inhumanely the slaves were treated. Afonso was almost assassinated by the Portuguese after he demanded an end to the slave trade in his kingdom.*

*Typically wars in West Africa were relatively short affairs that left a small number of causalities. The introduction of European weapons made these wars more drawn out and destructive affairs. Moreover, the only way Africans could acquire these firearms was through the trade of slaves. A king of Dahomey once requested that Europeans establish a firearms factory in his nation, but this request went ignored. Firearms became necessary for African nations to defend themselves both from African rivals as well as from European intrusion, but the only way to acquire these weapons was through the slave trade. This situation only benefited the competing European powers that were able to play Africans against each other.*

Finally, the slave trade left a negative legacy on both sides of the Atlantic. The Africans that were brought to the Americas were forced to labor as slaves, while enduring some of the most inhumane treatment imaginable. Those who remained, however, were left to mourn the lost of their friends and relatives that were taken away. *A handful of African traders and rulers may have gained some wealth from the slave trade, but overall it was a very negative event for Africa. There were African kingdoms, such as the Kongo Kingdom, that eventually fell due to the onslaught brought about by the slave trade.* We often think of the negative impact that the slave trade had on those who were captured, but the slave trade was also devastating for those who escaped being captured as well.

Some Africans did play a role in the slave trade and the trade could not have been as large as it was without cooperation from Africans. With that being said, *I think many people who have not properly studied the slave trade have a tendency to overstate how involved Africans were in a misguided attempt to shift the blame of the slave trade on Africans.*

—

_Dwayne is the author of several books on the history and experiences of African people, both on the continent and in the diaspora. His books are available through Amazon. You can also follow Dwayne on Facebook._

Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade | HuffPost


----------



## irosie91

IM2 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your ancestors sold family members; you can't handle that?  Tough.
> You've had equal rights since the 1960s and you still can't live without going to the bar and getting a daily dose of under the panties satisfaction.
> If you can't straighten out your act don't expect others to give you hand outs that you''ll simply spend on clothes and use to upgrade from BMWs to Roll Royces.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since none of that happened you just show yourself to be another dumb white person.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> none of what happened?    -----I am not going to address the "selling family members"-------if it did happen----it was, likely, rare.    But it is a fact that black African tribes did SELL  other blacks for several thousand years. -----because black Africans are just as perverse as are "white"  people and slavery was UBIQUITOUS thruout the world.     It is also a fact that it is not a UNIQUELY black experience.     It would be impossible to know WHERE TO BEGIN to try to compensate all the victims of injustice over the past 5000 years.     Talk to a person from south east asia-------they are convinced that the BRITISH EMPIRE  is still contaminating their blood and tea cups
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> These words you posted are not exactly facts.
Click to expand...


Is that the best you can do?     ----"not exactly fact...."  ?


----------



## CrusaderFrank

My people first arrived here in 1920, I don't owe anything


----------



## irosie91

IM2 said:


> *Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade*
> By Dwayne Wong (Omowale)
> 
> There are many misconceptions about African history and nowhere is this more true than the topic of the slave trade. Very often I see comments by people who argue that Africans sold each other into slavery. There is some element of truth to this, but to speak of the slave trade solely as Africans selling each other t is a gross oversimplification of what was a complex historical event. *This also seems to be an attempt to shift the burden of the slave trade on the victims of that very trade. In How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Walter Rodney mentions how the white author of a book on the slave trade admitted that he was encouraged by other scholars to blame the slave trade solely on the Africans. This narrative helps to lessen European guilt by making Africans seem just as or even more guilty of being involved in the slave trade.* This piece is not an attempt to ignore the African role in the slave trade or to absolve those that were involved, but to to provide a more complete picture of the African involvement in slave trade.
> 
> *In the first place, the Portuguese initiated what eventually became the Trans-Atlantic slave trade mainly through slave raids along the coasts of Africa. The first of these raids came in 1444 and was led by Lançarote de Freitas. The problem with raiding for slaves was that it was extremely dangerous. For instance, the slave trader Nuno Tristão was killed during an ambush. Slave raiding proved to be an extremely dangerous way to obtain slaves, but buying slaves was much safer and took less effort on the part of the Europeans. Therefore, the first phase of the slave trade began not with a trade, but with a series of raids. This point is especially important because although the slave trade was on some levels based on a partnership between European buyers and African traders, the slave trade did not begin as such.*
> 
> *Moreover, the partnership between the traders and buyers was an uneasy one. The European slave traders often betrayed those who supplied them with slaves. A famous case of this was the African slave trader Daaga who was tricked and captured by slave traders. He was taken to Trinidad where he would eventually lead a mutiny. Another example is given by Anne Bailey in her book African Voices in the Atlantic Slave Trade. She mentions the story of Chief Ndorkutsu who had been providing captives to the European traders. Eventually some of the Ndorkutsu’s own relatives were tricked into boarding a slave ship and then taken as slaves to Cuba. In some cases, such as that of Madam Tinubu in Nigeria and Afonso of the Kongo Kingdom, those Africans that initially gave African captives to the Europeans came to resist the slave trade. Tinubu had a change of heart when she realized how inhumanely the slaves were treated. Afonso was almost assassinated by the Portuguese after he demanded an end to the slave trade in his kingdom.*
> 
> *Typically wars in West Africa were relatively short affairs that left a small number of causalities. The introduction of European weapons made these wars more drawn out and destructive affairs. Moreover, the only way Africans could acquire these firearms was through the trade of slaves. A king of Dahomey once requested that Europeans establish a firearms factory in his nation, but this request went ignored. Firearms became necessary for African nations to defend themselves both from African rivals as well as from European intrusion, but the only way to acquire these weapons was through the slave trade. This situation only benefited the competing European powers that were able to play Africans against each other.*
> 
> Finally, the slave trade left a negative legacy on both sides of the Atlantic. The Africans that were brought to the Americas were forced to labor as slaves, while enduring some of the most inhumane treatment imaginable. Those who remained, however, were left to mourn the lost of their friends and relatives that were taken away. *A handful of African traders and rulers may have gained some wealth from the slave trade, but overall it was a very negative event for Africa. There were African kingdoms, such as the Kongo Kingdom, that eventually fell due to the onslaught brought about by the slave trade.* We often think of the negative impact that the slave trade had on those who were captured, but the slave trade was also devastating for those who escaped being captured as well.
> 
> Some Africans did play a role in the slave trade and the trade could not have been as large as it was without cooperation from Africans. With that being said, *I think many people who have not properly studied the slave trade have a tendency to overstate how involved Africans were in a misguided attempt to shift the blame of the slave trade on Africans.*
> 
> —
> 
> _Dwayne is the author of several books on the history and experiences of African people, both on the continent and in the diaspora. His books are available through Amazon. You can also follow Dwayne on Facebook._
> 
> Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade | HuffPost



oh----ok ----the very BEST you could do   "some people overstate how involved Africans were....." ? ----<<< really impressive.    Your citation is silly---it dates the INCEPTION OF THE CONCEPT OF SLAVERY  to 
1444  AD<<<<<<<<<  *ROFLMAO*


----------



## BlackSand

irosie91 said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free housing provided by the master.
> Free food provided by the master.
> Free healthcare provided by the master.
> Unfavorable working conditions.
> 
> There's some stupid folks currently fighting pretty hard to bring slavery back ...
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you are UNFORTUNATELY right------but it is not Trump and his minions----it is the  "NOBLE SOCIALISTS"     who actively and SELF RIGHTEOUSLY  seek this miserable outcome.  -------the first step towards disaster is big, giant,  government subsidized housing.     Such projects ----historically --descend into lairs of crime.     HISTORY-------which is one of the reasons I do not INSIST on   KEEPING FAMILIES BEING DETAINED at the southern border intact.     "INTACT"  where? -------giant hotels?   Just stick anybody and everyone in some GIANT HOTEL with separate accommodations for families?  -------idle non paying people?     ----THINK CRIME
Click to expand...



 ... You are either one of the slaves or one of the owners.

.​


----------



## IM2

*Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them

EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._

_Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_

*HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _

The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.

Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*

The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.

*The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.

This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.

The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.

Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.

*Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*

*For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*

*Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”

So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*

*Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.

White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”

*In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.

*Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*

Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.

Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them


----------



## karpenter

IM2 said:
			
		

> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery


HA-HARR !!
No Wonder No One With Even Half A Brain Listens
Didn't You Also Post This Contradictory Evidence ??
The Story of Africa| BBC World Service
Or Was That Your Buddy...

It Doesn't Matter
Slaves Are Chattel To Be Sold And Bought
No Matter Who Owns Them

'...would sell our own brothers and sisters?'...
The Black Owners/Traders In America Sure Did



			
				MizMolly said:
			
		

> Supposedly only whites lie about history, it appears the Africans dont want to admit their ancestors roles in slavery


Slavery In The United States Happened In A Bubble
All By It Self

Slavery Didn't Exist
Until America Went To Africa And Invented It


----------



## IM2

irosie91 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade*
> By Dwayne Wong (Omowale)
> 
> There are many misconceptions about African history and nowhere is this more true than the topic of the slave trade. Very often I see comments by people who argue that Africans sold each other into slavery. There is some element of truth to this, but to speak of the slave trade solely as Africans selling each other t is a gross oversimplification of what was a complex historical event. *This also seems to be an attempt to shift the burden of the slave trade on the victims of that very trade. In How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Walter Rodney mentions how the white author of a book on the slave trade admitted that he was encouraged by other scholars to blame the slave trade solely on the Africans. This narrative helps to lessen European guilt by making Africans seem just as or even more guilty of being involved in the slave trade.* This piece is not an attempt to ignore the African role in the slave trade or to absolve those that were involved, but to to provide a more complete picture of the African involvement in slave trade.
> 
> *In the first place, the Portuguese initiated what eventually became the Trans-Atlantic slave trade mainly through slave raids along the coasts of Africa. The first of these raids came in 1444 and was led by Lançarote de Freitas. The problem with raiding for slaves was that it was extremely dangerous. For instance, the slave trader Nuno Tristão was killed during an ambush. Slave raiding proved to be an extremely dangerous way to obtain slaves, but buying slaves was much safer and took less effort on the part of the Europeans. Therefore, the first phase of the slave trade began not with a trade, but with a series of raids. This point is especially important because although the slave trade was on some levels based on a partnership between European buyers and African traders, the slave trade did not begin as such.*
> 
> *Moreover, the partnership between the traders and buyers was an uneasy one. The European slave traders often betrayed those who supplied them with slaves. A famous case of this was the African slave trader Daaga who was tricked and captured by slave traders. He was taken to Trinidad where he would eventually lead a mutiny. Another example is given by Anne Bailey in her book African Voices in the Atlantic Slave Trade. She mentions the story of Chief Ndorkutsu who had been providing captives to the European traders. Eventually some of the Ndorkutsu’s own relatives were tricked into boarding a slave ship and then taken as slaves to Cuba. In some cases, such as that of Madam Tinubu in Nigeria and Afonso of the Kongo Kingdom, those Africans that initially gave African captives to the Europeans came to resist the slave trade. Tinubu had a change of heart when she realized how inhumanely the slaves were treated. Afonso was almost assassinated by the Portuguese after he demanded an end to the slave trade in his kingdom.*
> 
> *Typically wars in West Africa were relatively short affairs that left a small number of causalities. The introduction of European weapons made these wars more drawn out and destructive affairs. Moreover, the only way Africans could acquire these firearms was through the trade of slaves. A king of Dahomey once requested that Europeans establish a firearms factory in his nation, but this request went ignored. Firearms became necessary for African nations to defend themselves both from African rivals as well as from European intrusion, but the only way to acquire these weapons was through the slave trade. This situation only benefited the competing European powers that were able to play Africans against each other.*
> 
> Finally, the slave trade left a negative legacy on both sides of the Atlantic. The Africans that were brought to the Americas were forced to labor as slaves, while enduring some of the most inhumane treatment imaginable. Those who remained, however, were left to mourn the lost of their friends and relatives that were taken away. *A handful of African traders and rulers may have gained some wealth from the slave trade, but overall it was a very negative event for Africa. There were African kingdoms, such as the Kongo Kingdom, that eventually fell due to the onslaught brought about by the slave trade.* We often think of the negative impact that the slave trade had on those who were captured, but the slave trade was also devastating for those who escaped being captured as well.
> 
> Some Africans did play a role in the slave trade and the trade could not have been as large as it was without cooperation from Africans. With that being said, *I think many people who have not properly studied the slave trade have a tendency to overstate how involved Africans were in a misguided attempt to shift the blame of the slave trade on Africans.*
> 
> —
> 
> _Dwayne is the author of several books on the history and experiences of African people, both on the continent and in the diaspora. His books are available through Amazon. You can also follow Dwayne on Facebook._
> 
> Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade | HuffPost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh----ok ----the very BEST you could do   "some people overstate how involved Africans were....." ? ----<<< really impressive.    Your citation is silly---it dates the INCEPTION OF THE CONCEPT OF SLAVERY  to
> 1444  AD<<<<<<<<<  *ROFLMAO*
Click to expand...


Some will do anything to deny the truth. You are really dumb. Learn how to read.

*"In the first place, the Portuguese initiated what eventually became the Trans-Atlantic slave trade mainly through slave raids along the coasts of Africa. The first of these raids came in 1444 and was led by Lançarote de Freitas. "*

It is apparent to anyone who can read that the author was referring to the Trans Atlantic slave trade. Your excuse laden argument about things happening 10,000 yeas ago is quite frankly, ignorant.


----------



## IM2

karpenter said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> HA-HARR !!
> No Wonder No One With Even Half A Brain Listens
> Didn't You Also Post This Contradictory Evidence ??
> The Story of Africa| BBC World Service
> Or Was That Your Buddy...
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Supposedly only whites lie about history, it appears the Africans dont want to admit their ancestors roles in slavery
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slavery In The United States Happened In A Bubble
> All By It Self
> 
> Slavery Didn't Exist
> Until America Went To Africa And Invented It
Click to expand...


Yeah we know dumb ass.


----------



## irosie91

IM2 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade*
> By Dwayne Wong (Omowale)
> 
> There are many misconceptions about African history and nowhere is this more true than the topic of the slave trade. Very often I see comments by people who argue that Africans sold each other into slavery. There is some element of truth to this, but to speak of the slave trade solely as Africans selling each other t is a gross oversimplification of what was a complex historical event. *This also seems to be an attempt to shift the burden of the slave trade on the victims of that very trade. In How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Walter Rodney mentions how the white author of a book on the slave trade admitted that he was encouraged by other scholars to blame the slave trade solely on the Africans. This narrative helps to lessen European guilt by making Africans seem just as or even more guilty of being involved in the slave trade.* This piece is not an attempt to ignore the African role in the slave trade or to absolve those that were involved, but to to provide a more complete picture of the African involvement in slave trade.
> 
> *In the first place, the Portuguese initiated what eventually became the Trans-Atlantic slave trade mainly through slave raids along the coasts of Africa. The first of these raids came in 1444 and was led by Lançarote de Freitas. The problem with raiding for slaves was that it was extremely dangerous. For instance, the slave trader Nuno Tristão was killed during an ambush. Slave raiding proved to be an extremely dangerous way to obtain slaves, but buying slaves was much safer and took less effort on the part of the Europeans. Therefore, the first phase of the slave trade began not with a trade, but with a series of raids. This point is especially important because although the slave trade was on some levels based on a partnership between European buyers and African traders, the slave trade did not begin as such.*
> 
> *Moreover, the partnership between the traders and buyers was an uneasy one. The European slave traders often betrayed those who supplied them with slaves. A famous case of this was the African slave trader Daaga who was tricked and captured by slave traders. He was taken to Trinidad where he would eventually lead a mutiny. Another example is given by Anne Bailey in her book African Voices in the Atlantic Slave Trade. She mentions the story of Chief Ndorkutsu who had been providing captives to the European traders. Eventually some of the Ndorkutsu’s own relatives were tricked into boarding a slave ship and then taken as slaves to Cuba. In some cases, such as that of Madam Tinubu in Nigeria and Afonso of the Kongo Kingdom, those Africans that initially gave African captives to the Europeans came to resist the slave trade. Tinubu had a change of heart when she realized how inhumanely the slaves were treated. Afonso was almost assassinated by the Portuguese after he demanded an end to the slave trade in his kingdom.*
> 
> *Typically wars in West Africa were relatively short affairs that left a small number of causalities. The introduction of European weapons made these wars more drawn out and destructive affairs. Moreover, the only way Africans could acquire these firearms was through the trade of slaves. A king of Dahomey once requested that Europeans establish a firearms factory in his nation, but this request went ignored. Firearms became necessary for African nations to defend themselves both from African rivals as well as from European intrusion, but the only way to acquire these weapons was through the slave trade. This situation only benefited the competing European powers that were able to play Africans against each other.*
> 
> Finally, the slave trade left a negative legacy on both sides of the Atlantic. The Africans that were brought to the Americas were forced to labor as slaves, while enduring some of the most inhumane treatment imaginable. Those who remained, however, were left to mourn the lost of their friends and relatives that were taken away. *A handful of African traders and rulers may have gained some wealth from the slave trade, but overall it was a very negative event for Africa. There were African kingdoms, such as the Kongo Kingdom, that eventually fell due to the onslaught brought about by the slave trade.* We often think of the negative impact that the slave trade had on those who were captured, but the slave trade was also devastating for those who escaped being captured as well.
> 
> Some Africans did play a role in the slave trade and the trade could not have been as large as it was without cooperation from Africans. With that being said, *I think many people who have not properly studied the slave trade have a tendency to overstate how involved Africans were in a misguided attempt to shift the blame of the slave trade on Africans.*
> 
> —
> 
> _Dwayne is the author of several books on the history and experiences of African people, both on the continent and in the diaspora. His books are available through Amazon. You can also follow Dwayne on Facebook._
> 
> Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade | HuffPost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh----ok ----the very BEST you could do   "some people overstate how involved Africans were....." ? ----<<< really impressive.    Your citation is silly---it dates the INCEPTION OF THE CONCEPT OF SLAVERY  to
> 1444  AD<<<<<<<<<  *ROFLMAO*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some will do anything to deny the truth. You are really dumb. Learn how to read.
> 
> *"In the first place, the Portuguese initiated what eventually became the Trans-Atlantic slave trade mainly through slave raids along the coasts of Africa. The first of these raids came in 1444 and was led by Lançarote de Freitas. "*
> 
> It is apparent to anyone who can read that the author was referring to the Trans Atlantic slave trade. Your excuse laden argument about things happening 10,000 yeas ago is quite frankly, ignorant.
Click to expand...


OH!!!     ok-----the ONLY SLAVERY that  "COUNTS"   is that involving trans atlantic transport-------I GOT IT NOW


----------



## karpenter

IM2 said:
			
		

> These words you posted are not exactly facts.


Because The Only 'Facts' You Want Anyone To Accept
Is By Black Re-Historians And Apologists Only

Eye-Witness Accounts By Whites
_Traveling In Africa In Those Times_
Are All Un-Acceptable Lies To You


----------



## BlackSand

irosie91 said:


> OH!!!     ok-----the ONLY SLAVERY that  "COUNTS"   is that involving trans atlantic transport-------I GOT IT NOW



 ... You should have learned by now.
They don't want you to respond.

They just want you to listen.
You will never understand the way things really are ...
Because you aren't black.

.​


----------



## Cellblock2429

IM2 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /——-/ 60 years of welfare, food stamps and housing for those who didn’t spend one second in bondage paid by those who never held slaves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /—-/ Proof please.
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /——-/ 60 years of welfare, food stamps and housing for those who didn’t spend one second in bondage paid by those who never held slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Apparently your ancestors in Africa sold their neighbors into slavery. You need to pay reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I do not. You are just another dumb white who knows nothing about what went on repeatimg a half truth and are. just running your mouth.
Click to expand...

/-----/ You denying the long established history doesn't make it go away.
The *Atlantic slave trade* or *transatlantic slave trade* involved the transportation by slave traders of enslaved African people, mainly to the Americas. The slave trade regularly used the triangular trade route and its Middle Passage, and existed from the 16th to the 19th centuries. The vast majority of those who were enslaved and transported in the transatlantic slave trade were Africans from central and western Africa,* who had been sold by other West Africans to Western European slave traders* (with a small number being captured directly by the slave traders in coastal raids), who brought them to the Americas.[1] The South Atlantic and Caribbean economies especially were dependent on the supply of secure labour for the production of commodity crops, making goods and clothing to sell in Europe. This was crucial to those western European countries which, in the late 17th and 18th centuries, were vying with each other to create overseas empires.[2] Atlantic slave trade - Wikipedia


----------



## karpenter

IM2 said:
			
		

> Some will do anything to deny the truth. .


You And Your Contemporary 'Academics'
Are Prime Examples

If Black History Month
Consisted Of More Black History Than Just The United States
You Wouldn't Want It


----------



## IM2

Cellblock2429 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /—-/ Proof please.
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Apparently your ancestors in Africa sold their neighbors into slavery. You need to pay reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I do not. You are just another dumb white who knows nothing about what went on repeatimg a half truth and are. just running your mouth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /-----/ You denying the long established history doesn't make it go away.
> The *Atlantic slave trade* or *transatlantic slave trade* involved the transportation by slave traders of enslaved African people, mainly to the Americas. The slave trade regularly used the triangular trade route and its Middle Passage, and existed from the 16th to the 19th centuries. The vast majority of those who were enslaved and transported in the transatlantic slave trade were Africans from central and western Africa,* who had been sold by other West Africans to Western European slave traders* (with a small number being captured directly by the slave traders in coastal raids), who brought them to the Americas.[1] The South Atlantic and Caribbean economies especially were dependent on the supply of secure labour for the production of commodity crops, making goods and clothing to sell in Europe. This was crucial to those western European countries which, in the late 17th and 18th centuries, were vying with each other to create overseas empires.[2] Atlantic slave trade - Wikipedia
Click to expand...


I deny nothing. But you do. It's all you got.


----------



## Cellblock2429

IM2 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /—-/ Proof please.
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /——/ Said no White person ever.,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently whites have said that and you are one of them who did so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——/ Apparently your ancestors in Africa sold their neighbors into slavery. You need to pay reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I do not. You are just another dumb white who knows nothing about what went on repeatimg a half truth and are. just running your mouth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /-----/ You denying the long established history doesn't make it go away.
> The *Atlantic slave trade* or *transatlantic slave trade* involved the transportation by slave traders of enslaved African people, mainly to the Americas. The slave trade regularly used the triangular trade route and its Middle Passage, and existed from the 16th to the 19th centuries. The vast majority of those who were enslaved and transported in the transatlantic slave trade were Africans from central and western Africa,* who had been sold by other West Africans to Western European slave traders* (with a small number being captured directly by the slave traders in coastal raids), who brought them to the Americas.[1] The South Atlantic and Caribbean economies especially were dependent on the supply of secure labour for the production of commodity crops, making goods and clothing to sell in Europe. This was crucial to those western European countries which, in the late 17th and 18th centuries, were vying with each other to create overseas empires.[2] Atlantic slave trade - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I deny nothing. But you do. It's all you got.
Click to expand...

/-----/ You deny nothing?????  Allow me to quote you *# 320 "No I do not. You are just another dumb white who knows nothing about what went on repeatimg a half truth and are. just running your mouth."  *Hint: "No I do not..." is a denial.


----------



## IM2

*Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.
*
On the latest episode of her MTV web series _Decoded,_ comedian and activist Franchesca Ramsey highlighted the unfortunate tendency many Americans have to ignore or erase the role slavery played in the country’s past.

"We talk about race a lot on this show," Ramsey said. "But thanks to our current election cycle, _apparently_ we have to go back to the beginning to shed some light on the myths people use to justify slavery."

After Michelle Obama’s DNC speech about her historical legacy as the first black first lady "living in a house built by slaves," slavery fact-checking ensued. The first lady’s statement checked out.

But the fact that people tried to suggest otherwise shows just how little many Americans know about an institution that defined the country at its inception, and how that ignorance prevents us from taking an honest look at the country’s horrific past.

In response, Ramsey broke down five of the most common excuses used for slavery.

*1) "Slaves were well-fed"*
After the first lady tried to use her DNC speech to show that her time in the White House demonstrated how far racial progress in America has come, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly decided to use her moment to put a positive spin on slavery itself.

The following day, O’Reilly challenged Obama on _The O’Reilly Factor_, saying "slaves were well-fed." Then, after a backlash, he defended his statement by clarifying that slaves’ diet consisted of "meat, bread, and other staples."

Ramsey cited other common arguments that parallel O’Reilly’s, like the idea that some slave masters treated slaves well or that being a slave who worked in the big house was at least better than working outside in the fields.

But, as Ramsey noted, "this argument is immaterial, as in it doesn’t matter."

No matter their housing or food, the inherent problem with slavery is the fact that people were slaves in the first place, which is only compounded by the ways Africans were taken from their countries of origin and transported to an unknown place against their will where no one was required to muster even an ounce of recognition of their humanity.

"If aliens abducted your brother, sister, and favorite uncle, and stuck a feeding tube down their throats, while forcing them to build their emperor’s house, would you think, ‘Well at least the aliens fed my family’?" Ramsey asked on _Decoded_. "I don’t think so."

*2) Slaves were happy to have work*
Slaves may have had many excruciating jobs, including building much of America. But that doesn’t mean it’s okay to equate slavery with employment.

"Newsflash: Although you might hate your job, slavery isn’t employment," Ramsey said. "It wasn’t voluntary, and it has no comparison to working at a job."

But even textbook publishers fail to get this fact straight.

Last October, McGraw-Hill Education came under fire after Roni Dean-Burren, the mother of a high school freshman in Texas, shared a photo of immigration patterns in her son’s geography textbook that said the slave trade "brought millions of workers" to the US through slavery from 1500s to the 1800s. But "workers" and slaves are not at all the same thing.

On _Decoded_, Ramsey explained the major difference: "Being forcibly taken from your home, put in shackles on a disease-infested ship, and forced to do hard labor from sunrise to sunset is not the same thing as clocking in at Starbucks, okay?"

*3) Other countries had slavery too*
It’s true America wasn’t the only country that had slavery. In fact, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade’s name signals the scope of slave routes, which traveled from the shores of West and Central Africa to the Caribbean before stopping in the US.

Many of the people (nearly 4 million) taken from Africa to be slaves between the 16th and 19th centuries ended up in Brazil because the slavery conditions in Brazil were so brutal that continued importation was essential to make up for the high death rate, which outpaced birth rate.

But slavery elsewhere doesn’t change the fact that slavery in the US was still wrong.

"Even if slavery was common practice when America was doing it, it doesn’t make it right," Ramsey said. "Slavery is bad, and it was always bad, everywhere, no matter who’s doing it!"

*4) The Irish in America were also slaves*
Some people believe the Irish in America were also slaves because the Irish, historically, have faced persecution and many came to the US as indentured servants.

Ramsay’s response is simple: "No, they were not."

Ramsey has discredited this idea before. But that doesn’t change the fact that it has become a fixture for racist right-wing internet trolls.

In an interview with the Southern Poverty Law Center, Liam Hogan, an Irish historian, explained that the myth of Irish slaves "broadly claims that indentured servitude and penal servitude can be equated with racialized perpetual hereditary chattel slavery."

The point is to try to deflect the reality of black people’s enslavement in the US by mythologizing a group of white people who were also slaves.

But Ramsey underlined the main problem with this approach: "Class, let’s say this one together: Persecution is bad, but not the same as slavery!"

*5) Africans sold other Africans as slaves*
This is similar to saying slavery happened in other places. It’s true that Africans did sell other Africans into slavery, but that doesn’t absolve Americans and Europeans for their participation in slavery.

In fact, suggesting as much erases a lot of nuance about power dynamics involved with how both Africans and Europeans were involved in the process.

As Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. wrote for the New York Times in 2010, "Slavery was a business, highly organized and lucrative for European buyers and sellers alike."

But slavery in the US wasn’t exactly business as usual. Barbara Ransby, a historian at the University of
of Illinois at Chicago, noted for Colorlines that the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade exploited existing practices like selling prisoners of war into slavery to usher in "a heinous and brutal system that rested squarely on the dual pillars of white supremacy and ruthless capitalist greed."

Ramsey showcased the major takeaway from this historical fact: "It just means that West Africans also have a history to reckon with, just like us and every modern celebrity that thinks blackface is a joke."

*So why do people still try to justify slavery today?*
It turns out a lot of it has to do with the fact that America’s mythic greatness is inextricably tied to the atrocities of slavery Americans try to sweep under the rug.

Being honest about slavery, Ramsey said, forces us to grapple with the fact that our founding fathers who fought for freedom from Britain’s tyranny hypocritically kept an entire population in bondage. Additionally, recognizing slavery means addressing the systemic inequalities that have stayed with us long after its abolition.

"The blatant forms of racism we still see today, from disenfranchising black voters to police brutality, are rooted in the fact that people were brought here against their will and treated like they were subhuman," Ramsey said.

Acting like this isn’t the case isn’t a solution.

"We can’t keep ignoring and mythologizing slavery just because facing it head-on makes us feel bad," Ramsey said. "Part of the healing comes from facing it."

Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.


----------



## IM2

BlackSand said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> OH!!!     ok-----the ONLY SLAVERY that  "COUNTS"   is that involving trans atlantic transport-------I GOT IT NOW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... You should have learned by now.
> They don't want you to respond.
> 
> They just want you to listen.
> You will never understand the way things really are ...
> Because you aren't black.
> 
> .​
Click to expand...


You whites only want lecture us. Everything you say here about us whites do in this section of the forum. In fact all you guys do is project.


----------



## BlackSand

karpenter said:


> Fixed...



Perhaps that will work out better for them ... 

The only real fact is that the oppressed always have something in common.
They refused to fight in order to secure their freedom and general welfare.

.​


----------



## Cellblock2429

IM2 said:


> *Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.
> *
> On the latest episode of her MTV web series _Decoded,_ comedian and activist Franchesca Ramsey highlighted the unfortunate tendency many Americans have to ignore or erase the role slavery played in the country’s past.
> 
> "We talk about race a lot on this show," Ramsey said. "But thanks to our current election cycle, _apparently_ we have to go back to the beginning to shed some light on the myths people use to justify slavery."
> 
> After Michelle Obama’s DNC speech about her historical legacy as the first black first lady "living in a house built by slaves," slavery fact-checking ensued. The first lady’s statement checked out.
> 
> But the fact that people tried to suggest otherwise shows just how little many Americans know about an institution that defined the country at its inception, and how that ignorance prevents us from taking an honest look at the country’s horrific past.
> 
> In response, Ramsey broke down five of the most common excuses used for slavery.
> 
> *1) "Slaves were well-fed"*
> After the first lady tried to use her DNC speech to show that her time in the White House demonstrated how far racial progress in America has come, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly decided to use her moment to put a positive spin on slavery itself.
> 
> The following day, O’Reilly challenged Obama on _The O’Reilly Factor_, saying "slaves were well-fed." Then, after a backlash, he defended his statement by clarifying that slaves’ diet consisted of "meat, bread, and other staples."
> 
> Ramsey cited other common arguments that parallel O’Reilly’s, like the idea that some slave masters treated slaves well or that being a slave who worked in the big house was at least better than working outside in the fields.
> 
> But, as Ramsey noted, "this argument is immaterial, as in it doesn’t matter."
> 
> No matter their housing or food, the inherent problem with slavery is the fact that people were slaves in the first place, which is only compounded by the ways Africans were taken from their countries of origin and transported to an unknown place against their will where no one was required to muster even an ounce of recognition of their humanity.
> 
> "If aliens abducted your brother, sister, and favorite uncle, and stuck a feeding tube down their throats, while forcing them to build their emperor’s house, would you think, ‘Well at least the aliens fed my family’?" Ramsey asked on _Decoded_. "I don’t think so."
> 
> *2) Slaves were happy to have work*
> Slaves may have had many excruciating jobs, including building much of America. But that doesn’t mean it’s okay to equate slavery with employment.
> 
> "Newsflash: Although you might hate your job, slavery isn’t employment," Ramsey said. "It wasn’t voluntary, and it has no comparison to working at a job."
> 
> But even textbook publishers fail to get this fact straight.
> 
> Last October, McGraw-Hill Education came under fire after Roni Dean-Burren, the mother of a high school freshman in Texas, shared a photo of immigration patterns in her son’s geography textbook that said the slave trade "brought millions of workers" to the US through slavery from 1500s to the 1800s. But "workers" and slaves are not at all the same thing.
> 
> On _Decoded_, Ramsey explained the major difference: "Being forcibly taken from your home, put in shackles on a disease-infested ship, and forced to do hard labor from sunrise to sunset is not the same thing as clocking in at Starbucks, okay?"
> 
> *3) Other countries had slavery too*
> It’s true America wasn’t the only country that had slavery. In fact, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade’s name signals the scope of slave routes, which traveled from the shores of West and Central Africa to the Caribbean before stopping in the US.
> 
> Many of the people (nearly 4 million) taken from Africa to be slaves between the 16th and 19th centuries ended up in Brazil because the slavery conditions in Brazil were so brutal that continued importation was essential to make up for the high death rate, which outpaced birth rate.
> 
> But slavery elsewhere doesn’t change the fact that slavery in the US was still wrong.
> 
> "Even if slavery was common practice when America was doing it, it doesn’t make it right," Ramsey said. "Slavery is bad, and it was always bad, everywhere, no matter who’s doing it!"
> 
> *4) The Irish in America were also slaves*
> Some people believe the Irish in America were also slaves because the Irish, historically, have faced persecution and many came to the US as indentured servants.
> 
> Ramsay’s response is simple: "No, they were not."
> 
> Ramsey has discredited this idea before. But that doesn’t change the fact that it has become a fixture for racist right-wing internet trolls.
> 
> In an interview with the Southern Poverty Law Center, Liam Hogan, an Irish historian, explained that the myth of Irish slaves "broadly claims that indentured servitude and penal servitude can be equated with racialized perpetual hereditary chattel slavery."
> 
> The point is to try to deflect the reality of black people’s enslavement in the US by mythologizing a group of white people who were also slaves.
> 
> But Ramsey underlined the main problem with this approach: "Class, let’s say this one together: Persecution is bad, but not the same as slavery!"
> 
> *5) Africans sold other Africans as slaves*
> This is similar to saying slavery happened in other places. It’s true that Africans did sell other Africans into slavery, but that doesn’t absolve Americans and Europeans for their participation in slavery.
> 
> In fact, suggesting as much erases a lot of nuance about power dynamics involved with how both Africans and Europeans were involved in the process.
> 
> As Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. wrote for the New York Times in 2010, "Slavery was a business, highly organized and lucrative for European buyers and sellers alike."
> 
> But slavery in the US wasn’t exactly business as usual. Barbara Ransby, a historian at the University of
> of Illinois at Chicago, noted for Colorlines that the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade exploited existing practices like selling prisoners of war into slavery to usher in "a heinous and brutal system that rested squarely on the dual pillars of white supremacy and ruthless capitalist greed."
> 
> Ramsey showcased the major takeaway from this historical fact: "It just means that West Africans also have a history to reckon with, just like us and every modern celebrity that thinks blackface is a joke."
> 
> *So why do people still try to justify slavery today?*
> It turns out a lot of it has to do with the fact that America’s mythic greatness is inextricably tied to the atrocities of slavery Americans try to sweep under the rug.
> 
> Being honest about slavery, Ramsey said, forces us to grapple with the fact that our founding fathers who fought for freedom from Britain’s tyranny hypocritically kept an entire population in bondage. Additionally, recognizing slavery means addressing the systemic inequalities that have stayed with us long after its abolition.
> 
> "The blatant forms of racism we still see today, from disenfranchising black voters to police brutality, are rooted in the fact that people were brought here against their will and treated like they were subhuman," Ramsey said.
> 
> Acting like this isn’t the case isn’t a solution.
> 
> "We can’t keep ignoring and mythologizing slavery just because facing it head-on makes us feel bad," Ramsey said. "Part of the healing comes from facing it."
> 
> Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.


/----/ You claimed that Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery and yet you provided a link that admits it true: From your point *#5: It’s true that Africans did sell other Africans into slavery,

 *


----------



## irosie91

IM2 said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> OH!!!     ok-----the ONLY SLAVERY that  "COUNTS"   is that involving trans atlantic transport-------I GOT IT NOW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... You should have learned by now.
> They don't want you to respond.
> 
> They just want you to listen.
> You will never understand the way things really are ...
> Because you aren't black.
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You whites only want lecture us. Everything you say here about us whites do in this section of the forum. In fact all you guys do is project.
Click to expand...


try to be more specific.      To what does  "everything"  refer?


----------



## BlackSand

IM2 said:


> Blah-blah-blah ... In fact all you guys do is project.



If by that you mean fight a Revolution and win our Independence from Britain ...
Then build a country with slave labor ...

Then I don't guess I could argue with that ... 

.​


----------



## Cellblock2429

BlackSand said:


> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fixed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps that will work out better for them ...
> 
> The only real fact is that the oppressed always have something in common.
> They refused to fight in order to secure their freedom and general welfare.
> 
> .​
Click to expand...

/-----/ Which begs the question, If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.


----------



## BlackSand

Cellblock2429 said:


> /-----/ Which begs the question, If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.



There's no question to really beg.

It doesn't matter who sold who to whom if human slavery is the trade.
To me ... You cannot justify human slavery through any measure.

But by issuance of that ... It is assumed I would fight slavery in general ...
As well as fight and possibly die before allowing someone to make me a slave.

In one way or another ... Slavery involves compliance by the slave (brutal, forced, coerced or whatever).

.​


----------



## IM2

karpenter said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These words you posted are not exactly facts.
> 
> 
> 
> Because The Only 'Facts' You Want Anyone To Accept
> Is By Black Re-Historians And Apologists Only
> 
> Eye-Witness Accounts By Whites
> _Traveling In Africa In Those Times_
> Are All Un-Acceptable Lies To You
Click to expand...


Whites are well known historical revisionists. Africans do have a side in this and just because you are white and can't deal with the truth is of no importance to me. Almost every written and documented piece coming from Africans say the same thing. And it shows that Africans just did not run up to whites offering slaves for sale. And in the final analysis those Africans are not respnsible for the atrocities that happened to black slaves while in America. Those Africans did not make American law. An African did not decide Dred Scott , an African did not enact fugitive slave laws, slave patrols or anything else. You have no argument in this matter and you have nothing to disagree about. Not anything that makes sense anyway.


----------



## IM2

Cellblock2429 said:


> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fixed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps that will work out better for them ...
> 
> The only real fact is that the oppressed always have something in common.
> They refused to fight in order to secure their freedom and general welfare.
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /-----/ Which begs the question, If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.
Click to expand...


We'll just look for any straw we can.


----------



## karpenter

*Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.
So why do people still try to justify slavery today?*

No One Does Either Of These
No One...

So, Why Do You Post References
From Those That Issue False Claims, IM2 ??



			
				IM2 said:
			
		

> We'll just look for any straw we can.


Indeed You Do
But All You Source Is Thin Air


----------



## IM2

*Introduction*

Africans started to fight the transatlantic slave trade as soon as it began. Their struggles were multifaceted and covered four continents over four centuries. Still, they have often been underestimated, overlooked, or forgotten. African resistance was reported in European sources only when it concerned attacks on slave ships and company barracoons, but acts of resistance also took place far from the coast and thus escaped the slavers’ attention. To discover them, oral history, archaeology, and autobiographies and biographies of African victims of the slave trade have to be probed. Taken together, these various sources offer a detailed image of the varied strategies Africans used to defend themselves from and mount attacks against the slave trade.

African Resistance - The Abolition of The Slave Trade

*Defensive Strategies*

When the first navigators reached the coast of Mauritania in 1441 and Senegal in 1444, they organized systematic abductions, and met with hostility and reprisals. Although they continued kidnapping, they also started to buy people. But that policy also met with opposition. Explorer Alvise Ca’Damosto, who was attacked by 150 men on the River Gambia in 1454, wrote than when he tried to talk to them,

they replied that they had had news of our coming and of our trade with the negroes of Senega [Senegal River], who, if they sought our friendship could not but be bad men, for they firmly believed that we Christians ate human flesh, and that we only bought negroes to eat them; that for their part they did not want our friendship on any terms, but sought to slaughter us all, and to make a gift of our possessions to their lord.

But armed struggle was neither the only nor always the best strategy. Long-term approaches were also needed to protect people from the slave trade. Earthworks were built to thwart small-scale raids and kidnappings; some rivers were diverted so that they would not bring ships near settlements. Africans surrounded their main towns by thick walls, twelve feet high; they built ramparts and fortresses with deep ditches and planted venomous and thorny trees and bushes all around.

Communities deserted their vulnerable settings to relocate in hard-to-find, easy-to-defend places such as hills, mountains, underground tunnels, marshes, caves, forests, or behind high sand dunes. Some hamlets regrouped to defend themselves more easily. In southern Benin, people built small towns on stilts at the edge or in the middle of lakes. This innovation gave them a clear view of approaching raiders and allowed them enough time to take the appropriate measures.

Africans established work teams for protection, left the paths to their villages overgrown, stationed armed groups at vulnerable points, and covered their roofs with noisy leaves to detect would-be kidnappers. They used their habitat as a safeguard by reconfiguring the layout, size, and architecture of their houses, villages, and capital cities. They built their towns in mazes to confuse and disorient attackers. Houses were connected one with another; they abutted forests and the sea to make escape easier. Some communities adopted the most brutal tactics: they indiscriminately killed anyone who ventured close to their territory so as to discourage any incursion.

Some leaders actively worked against the transatlantic slave trade. One of the most famous was Abdel Kader Kane, the Muslim leader of the Futa Toro region in northern Senegal. Kane had succeeded in peopling his kingdom by retaking by force his people who had been kidnapped and by forbidding slave caravans from passing through his territory. After the French took three children from Futa, Kane sent a letter to the governor:

We are warning you that all those who will come to our land to trade [in slaves] will be killed and massacred if you do not send our children back. Would not somebody who was very hungry abstain from eating if he had to eat something cooked with his blood? We absolutely do not want you to buy Muslims under any circumstances. I repeat that if your intention is to always buy Muslims you should stay home and not come to our country anymore. Because all those who will come can be assured that they will lose their life.

On a personal level, families who could locate a captive on the coast gathered resources to obtain his or her release, even if it meant substituting another person for their loved one. Some relatives were even able to trace the whereabouts of kin deported to the Americas and tried - sometimes successfully - to buy their freedom.

Defensive Strategies - African Resistance - The Abolition of The Slave Trade

*Armed Struggle in Africa and in the Middle Passage*

As the slave trade expanded, resistance to it grew as well, and the need for shackles, guns, ropes, chains, iron balls, and whips tells an eloquent story of continuous and violent struggle from the hinterland to the high seas. As one slave trader remarked:

For the security and safekeeping of the slaves on board or on shore in the African barracoons, chains, leg irons, handcuffs, and strong houses are used. I would remark that this also is one of the forcible necessities resorted to for the preservation of the order, and as recourse against the dangerous consequences of this traffic.

Wherever possible, such as in Saint-Louis and Gorée (Senegal), James (Gambia), and Bance (Sierra Leone), the Europeans' barracoons were located on islands, which made escapes and attacks more difficult. In some areas, as soon as local people approached the boats,

the crew is ordered to take up arms, the cannons are aimed, and the fuses are lighted . . . One must, without any hesitation, shoot at them and not spare them. The loss of the vessel and the life of the crew are at stake.

The heavily fortified forts and barracoons attest to the Europeans' distrust and apprehension. They had to protect themselves, as Jean-Baptiste Durand of the Compagnie du Sénégal explained, "from the foreign vessels and from the Negroes living in the country."

These precautions notwithstanding, in the eighteenth century, Fort Saint-Joseph on the Senegal River was attacked and all commerce was interrupted for six years. Several conspiracies and actual revolts by captives erupted on Gorée Island and resulted in the death of the governor and several soldiers. In addition, the crews of quite a few slave ships were killed on the River Gambia; in Sierra Leone, people sacked the captives' quarters of the infamous trader John Ormond. Similar incidents occurred in other parts of the African coast. Written records document how Africans on shore attacked more than a hundred ships.

Some Western slavers maintained occult centers in their barracoons, staffed by men they paid to "work on" the captives, sometimes with medicinal plants. The objective was to kill any spirit of rebellion, to "tame" the detainees, and make them accept their fate. The existence of these centers shows the extent of the precautions taken by slavers to prevent rebellions on land and during the Middle Passage: shackles and guns controlled the body, while the spirit was broken.

But revolts on slave ships, although extremely difficult to organize and conduct, were numerous. About 420 revolts have been documented in slavers' papers, and they do not represent the totality. It is estimated that 100,000 Africans died in uprisings on the coast or during the Middle Passage. The fear of revolts resulted in additional costs for the slavers: larger crews, heavy weapons, and barricades. About 18 percent of the costs of the Middle Passage were incurred due to measures to thwart uprisings, and the captives who rose up saved, according to estimates, one million Africans from deportation by driving up the slavers' expenses.

Armed Struggle in Africa and in the Middle Passage - African Resistance - The Abolition of The Slave Trade

_*When one decides to argue in opposition to something it helps if you know what you are talking about.*_


----------



## Cellblock2429

IM2 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fixed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps that will work out better for them ...
> 
> The only real fact is that the oppressed always have something in common.
> They refused to fight in order to secure their freedom and general welfare.
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /-----/ Which begs the question, If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We'll just look for any straw we can.
Click to expand...

/-----/ No. I'm not looking for a straw. I'm looking for a simple answer to a simple question: If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.


----------



## IM2

karpenter said:


> *Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.
> So why do people still try to justify slavery today?*
> 
> No One Does Either Of These
> No One...
> 
> So, Why Do You Post References
> From Those That Issue False Claims, IM2 ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We'll just look for any straw we can.
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed You Do
> But All You Source Is Thin Air
Click to expand...


Actually you have done that.


----------



## IM2

Cellblock2429 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fixed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps that will work out better for them ...
> 
> The only real fact is that the oppressed always have something in common.
> They refused to fight in order to secure their freedom and general welfare.
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /-----/ Which begs the question, If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We'll just look for any straw we can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /-----/ No. I'm not looking for a straw. I'm looking for a simple answer to a simple question: If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.
Click to expand...


You were given an answer in post 353. I suggest you read that information then read the information presented in that website.


----------



## karpenter

BlackSand said:
			
		

> The only real fact is that the oppressed always have something in common.
> They refused to fight in order to secure their freedom and general welfare.​


Not Exactly...

Once Africans Were Introduced
To The Concept Of Individual Freedom, Here In The West
There Was At Least One Uprising In The South
And One Uprising Considered Real Successful In Haiti

But We Can See The Result Of The Haitian Uprising Today

Never-The-Less
The Out-Come Of The US Uprising Will Be The Same Again
If IM2's '...you don't want to be alive on that day' Delusion Ever Occurrs​


----------



## karpenter

IM2 said:
			
		

> *Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.
> So why do people still try to justify slavery today?*
> 
> Actually you have done that.


Cite...


----------



## BlackSand

karpenter said:


> Not Exactly...
> 
> Once Africans Were Introduced
> To The Concept Of Individual Freedom, Here In The West
> There Was At Least One Uprising In The South
> And One Uprising Considered Real Successful In Haiti
> 
> But We Can See The Result Of The Haitian Uprising Today
> 
> Never-The-Less
> The Out-Come Of The US Uprising Will Be The Same Again
> If IM2's '...you don't want to be alive on that day' Delusion Ever Occurrs​



If an uprising against the oppressor is successful ...
Then they are no longer oppressed ... 

I never suggested it was futile to fight ...
Just that freedom requires possible sacrifice, or you will be oppressed.

.​


----------



## karpenter

IM2 said:
			
		

> *Almost* every written and documented piece coming from Africans say the same thing.


'Almost'
You're Going To Leave Out
Magical Cities Paved In Gold
Ability To Fly
And Time/Space Traveling Pyramids ??

That Scholarship Is Too Outrageous Even For You ??


----------



## Cellblock2429

IM2 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fixed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps that will work out better for them ...
> 
> The only real fact is that the oppressed always have something in common.
> They refused to fight in order to secure their freedom and general welfare.
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /-----/ Which begs the question, If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We'll just look for any straw we can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /-----/ No. I'm not looking for a straw. I'm looking for a simple answer to a simple question: If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You were given an answer in post 353. I suggest you read that information then read the information presented in that website.
Click to expand...

/----/ Great. But apparently the African Nations didn't do enough to stop the slave trade. They had them greatly outnumbered.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who gets reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> All blacks?
> Just those who can show they descended from slaves?
> *What's wrong with starting with those who can trace their ancestry to a specific planation or sale*
> Those who immigrated here post slavery?
> What is black? Anyone with a dna test showing they have a black ancestor somewhere? 50%....100%....
> What is white?
> What about whites who had no part in the slave trade or immigrated post slavery, should they pay?
> *The government pays because the whites involved in the institution of chattel slavery would not have been able to do so but for the racist laws that they created and the government enforced.*
> How about whites who lost their lives running the Underground Railroad or working for voting rights for blacks...should they get recompense or are they part of the group that pays?
> *Not to discount their participation or the risks that they took but there were no laws requiring them to do anything unlike the laws that required black people be kept in captivity and returned to captivity if they managed to escape.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If the government pays it means I pay.
> 
> Isn’t affirmative action a form of reparation innacted by the government?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reparations were made to the Japanese Americans interned during WW2, paid out to each survivor. Not their descendents. A public apology by Reagan representing the government. In my opinion, that is just.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And those reparations should have been made along with the apology.  But what determines whether reparations should be paid is the harm that was done, not that our government managed to wait enough time til everyone who could come after it with a claim were all dead.  The harm didn't die with them, it was perpetuated for centuries through our government's racist and discriminatory laws and court rulings.  And the damage is still being incurred though not in the volume that it had previuosly but still plenty enough for us to know that the problems have not cured.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> there are plenty of reparations already in place. No more are needed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, there are no reparations in place. Not for blacks.
Click to expand...

In a sense there are.  Retain government programs were created just for Blacks benefit, those are reparations. Those are all that is needed.


----------



## irosie91

for the record-----the ancient  (really ancient---like 5000 years ago)  Egyptians---
had black slaves.      The Ancient Persians, too.   and the ancient Greeks. 
The romans did too-----but they preferred blue eyed Europeans when they could get them   
The slave trade was DOMINATED and CONTROLLED by arabs for thousands of
years.      Simon Legree did not invent it.     For reparations for slavery-----see the
arab league


----------



## irosie91

PS----lately------arabs are calling themselves  "people of color"  -----It
is a deflection ------a DENIAL OF RESPONSIBILITY


----------



## karpenter

irosie91 said:
			
		

> For reparations for slavery-----see the arab league


Maybe The Muslims Could Un-Castrate The Ones That Died In The Desert


----------



## toobfreak

DarkFury said:


> *NOT ONE DIME.*




Lessee, minimum wage labour was worth about a penny an hour in 1850.  Subtract from that the housing, food, clothes, healthcare and everything else that blacks got for free, what their families were paid who sold them into slavery, a lot of them might still end up owing us something.  If anyone can prove they are the rightful descendant of a slave and have records of hours they worked, benefits, etc., upon which to make a case, they might just end up being pursued by the IRS instead for unpaid debt to the United States.  All slave descendants making claims for "reparations" please step forward and make your case so the IRS can talk to you.


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them


This ended 150 years ago.

Rather than focusing in it why not focus on the problems of today?  Reparations won’t fix any problems, aren’t truly just in that they don’t go to those who were actually enslaved, and will only exacerbate racial hate because there will be those who will see it as just another entitlement reserved for blacks?


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> *Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.
> *
> On the latest episode of her MTV web series _Decoded,_ comedian and activist Franchesca Ramsey highlighted the unfortunate tendency many Americans have to ignore or erase the role slavery played in the country’s past.
> 
> "We talk about race a lot on this show," Ramsey said. "But thanks to our current election cycle, _apparently_ we have to go back to the beginning to shed some light on the myths people use to justify slavery."
> 
> After Michelle Obama’s DNC speech about her historical legacy as the first black first lady "living in a house built by slaves," slavery fact-checking ensued. The first lady’s statement checked out.
> 
> But the fact that people tried to suggest otherwise shows just how little many Americans know about an institution that defined the country at its inception, and how that ignorance prevents us from taking an honest look at the country’s horrific past.
> 
> In response, Ramsey broke down five of the most common excuses used for slavery.
> 
> *1) "Slaves were well-fed"*
> After the first lady tried to use her DNC speech to show that her time in the White House demonstrated how far racial progress in America has come, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly decided to use her moment to put a positive spin on slavery itself.
> 
> The following day, O’Reilly challenged Obama on _The O’Reilly Factor_, saying "slaves were well-fed." Then, after a backlash, he defended his statement by clarifying that slaves’ diet consisted of "meat, bread, and other staples."
> 
> Ramsey cited other common arguments that parallel O’Reilly’s, like the idea that some slave masters treated slaves well or that being a slave who worked in the big house was at least better than working outside in the fields.
> 
> But, as Ramsey noted, "this argument is immaterial, as in it doesn’t matter."
> 
> No matter their housing or food, the inherent problem with slavery is the fact that people were slaves in the first place, which is only compounded by the ways Africans were taken from their countries of origin and transported to an unknown place against their will where no one was required to muster even an ounce of recognition of their humanity.
> 
> "If aliens abducted your brother, sister, and favorite uncle, and stuck a feeding tube down their throats, while forcing them to build their emperor’s house, would you think, ‘Well at least the aliens fed my family’?" Ramsey asked on _Decoded_. "I don’t think so."
> 
> *2) Slaves were happy to have work*
> Slaves may have had many excruciating jobs, including building much of America. But that doesn’t mean it’s okay to equate slavery with employment.
> 
> "Newsflash: Although you might hate your job, slavery isn’t employment," Ramsey said. "It wasn’t voluntary, and it has no comparison to working at a job."
> 
> But even textbook publishers fail to get this fact straight.
> 
> Last October, McGraw-Hill Education came under fire after Roni Dean-Burren, the mother of a high school freshman in Texas, shared a photo of immigration patterns in her son’s geography textbook that said the slave trade "brought millions of workers" to the US through slavery from 1500s to the 1800s. But "workers" and slaves are not at all the same thing.
> 
> On _Decoded_, Ramsey explained the major difference: "Being forcibly taken from your home, put in shackles on a disease-infested ship, and forced to do hard labor from sunrise to sunset is not the same thing as clocking in at Starbucks, okay?"
> 
> *3) Other countries had slavery too*
> It’s true America wasn’t the only country that had slavery. In fact, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade’s name signals the scope of slave routes, which traveled from the shores of West and Central Africa to the Caribbean before stopping in the US.
> 
> Many of the people (nearly 4 million) taken from Africa to be slaves between the 16th and 19th centuries ended up in Brazil because the slavery conditions in Brazil were so brutal that continued importation was essential to make up for the high death rate, which outpaced birth rate.
> 
> But slavery elsewhere doesn’t change the fact that slavery in the US was still wrong.
> 
> "Even if slavery was common practice when America was doing it, it doesn’t make it right," Ramsey said. "Slavery is bad, and it was always bad, everywhere, no matter who’s doing it!"
> 
> *4) The Irish in America were also slaves*
> Some people believe the Irish in America were also slaves because the Irish, historically, have faced persecution and many came to the US as indentured servants.
> 
> Ramsay’s response is simple: "No, they were not."
> 
> Ramsey has discredited this idea before. But that doesn’t change the fact that it has become a fixture for racist right-wing internet trolls.
> 
> In an interview with the Southern Poverty Law Center, Liam Hogan, an Irish historian, explained that the myth of Irish slaves "broadly claims that indentured servitude and penal servitude can be equated with racialized perpetual hereditary chattel slavery."
> 
> The point is to try to deflect the reality of black people’s enslavement in the US by mythologizing a group of white people who were also slaves.
> 
> But Ramsey underlined the main problem with this approach: "Class, let’s say this one together: Persecution is bad, but not the same as slavery!"
> 
> *5) Africans sold other Africans as slaves*
> This is similar to saying slavery happened in other places. It’s true that Africans did sell other Africans into slavery, but that doesn’t absolve Americans and Europeans for their participation in slavery.
> 
> In fact, suggesting as much erases a lot of nuance about power dynamics involved with how both Africans and Europeans were involved in the process.
> 
> As Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. wrote for the New York Times in 2010, "Slavery was a business, highly organized and lucrative for European buyers and sellers alike."
> 
> But slavery in the US wasn’t exactly business as usual. Barbara Ransby, a historian at the University of
> of Illinois at Chicago, noted for Colorlines that the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade exploited existing practices like selling prisoners of war into slavery to usher in "a heinous and brutal system that rested squarely on the dual pillars of white supremacy and ruthless capitalist greed."
> 
> Ramsey showcased the major takeaway from this historical fact: "It just means that West Africans also have a history to reckon with, just like us and every modern celebrity that thinks blackface is a joke."
> 
> *So why do people still try to justify slavery today?*
> It turns out a lot of it has to do with the fact that America’s mythic greatness is inextricably tied to the atrocities of slavery Americans try to sweep under the rug.
> 
> Being honest about slavery, Ramsey said, forces us to grapple with the fact that our founding fathers who fought for freedom from Britain’s tyranny hypocritically kept an entire population in bondage. Additionally, recognizing slavery means addressing the systemic inequalities that have stayed with us long after its abolition.
> 
> "The blatant forms of racism we still see today, from disenfranchising black voters to police brutality, are rooted in the fact that people were brought here against their will and treated like they were subhuman," Ramsey said.
> 
> Acting like this isn’t the case isn’t a solution.
> 
> "We can’t keep ignoring and mythologizing slavery just because facing it head-on makes us feel bad," Ramsey said. "Part of the healing comes from facing it."
> 
> Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.


Slavery is indefensible today but it is an integral part in the formation of our country and the economy of the south would never have grown without slave labor.

You also have to understand it in the context of the times, it was a common preactice, but we clung to it long after much of the world ended it.

It utterly flummoxes me that people believe they were happy and well fed. People in a country that values freedom and liberty above all else (except maybe guns).  Says something about a rather ugly underbelly that is feeling empowered to come out in the open.


----------



## Toro

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.
> *
> On the latest episode of her MTV web series _Decoded,_ comedian and activist Franchesca Ramsey highlighted the unfortunate tendency many Americans have to ignore or erase the role slavery played in the country’s past.
> 
> "We talk about race a lot on this show," Ramsey said. "But thanks to our current election cycle, _apparently_ we have to go back to the beginning to shed some light on the myths people use to justify slavery."
> 
> After Michelle Obama’s DNC speech about her historical legacy as the first black first lady "living in a house built by slaves," slavery fact-checking ensued. The first lady’s statement checked out.
> 
> But the fact that people tried to suggest otherwise shows just how little many Americans know about an institution that defined the country at its inception, and how that ignorance prevents us from taking an honest look at the country’s horrific past.
> 
> In response, Ramsey broke down five of the most common excuses used for slavery.
> 
> *1) "Slaves were well-fed"*
> After the first lady tried to use her DNC speech to show that her time in the White House demonstrated how far racial progress in America has come, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly decided to use her moment to put a positive spin on slavery itself.
> 
> The following day, O’Reilly challenged Obama on _The O’Reilly Factor_, saying "slaves were well-fed." Then, after a backlash, he defended his statement by clarifying that slaves’ diet consisted of "meat, bread, and other staples."
> 
> Ramsey cited other common arguments that parallel O’Reilly’s, like the idea that some slave masters treated slaves well or that being a slave who worked in the big house was at least better than working outside in the fields.
> 
> But, as Ramsey noted, "this argument is immaterial, as in it doesn’t matter."
> 
> No matter their housing or food, the inherent problem with slavery is the fact that people were slaves in the first place, which is only compounded by the ways Africans were taken from their countries of origin and transported to an unknown place against their will where no one was required to muster even an ounce of recognition of their humanity.
> 
> "If aliens abducted your brother, sister, and favorite uncle, and stuck a feeding tube down their throats, while forcing them to build their emperor’s house, would you think, ‘Well at least the aliens fed my family’?" Ramsey asked on _Decoded_. "I don’t think so."
> 
> *2) Slaves were happy to have work*
> Slaves may have had many excruciating jobs, including building much of America. But that doesn’t mean it’s okay to equate slavery with employment.
> 
> "Newsflash: Although you might hate your job, slavery isn’t employment," Ramsey said. "It wasn’t voluntary, and it has no comparison to working at a job."
> 
> But even textbook publishers fail to get this fact straight.
> 
> Last October, McGraw-Hill Education came under fire after Roni Dean-Burren, the mother of a high school freshman in Texas, shared a photo of immigration patterns in her son’s geography textbook that said the slave trade "brought millions of workers" to the US through slavery from 1500s to the 1800s. But "workers" and slaves are not at all the same thing.
> 
> On _Decoded_, Ramsey explained the major difference: "Being forcibly taken from your home, put in shackles on a disease-infested ship, and forced to do hard labor from sunrise to sunset is not the same thing as clocking in at Starbucks, okay?"
> 
> *3) Other countries had slavery too*
> It’s true America wasn’t the only country that had slavery. In fact, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade’s name signals the scope of slave routes, which traveled from the shores of West and Central Africa to the Caribbean before stopping in the US.
> 
> Many of the people (nearly 4 million) taken from Africa to be slaves between the 16th and 19th centuries ended up in Brazil because the slavery conditions in Brazil were so brutal that continued importation was essential to make up for the high death rate, which outpaced birth rate.
> 
> But slavery elsewhere doesn’t change the fact that slavery in the US was still wrong.
> 
> "Even if slavery was common practice when America was doing it, it doesn’t make it right," Ramsey said. "Slavery is bad, and it was always bad, everywhere, no matter who’s doing it!"
> 
> *4) The Irish in America were also slaves*
> Some people believe the Irish in America were also slaves because the Irish, historically, have faced persecution and many came to the US as indentured servants.
> 
> Ramsay’s response is simple: "No, they were not."
> 
> Ramsey has discredited this idea before. But that doesn’t change the fact that it has become a fixture for racist right-wing internet trolls.
> 
> In an interview with the Southern Poverty Law Center, Liam Hogan, an Irish historian, explained that the myth of Irish slaves "broadly claims that indentured servitude and penal servitude can be equated with racialized perpetual hereditary chattel slavery."
> 
> The point is to try to deflect the reality of black people’s enslavement in the US by mythologizing a group of white people who were also slaves.
> 
> But Ramsey underlined the main problem with this approach: "Class, let’s say this one together: Persecution is bad, but not the same as slavery!"
> 
> *5) Africans sold other Africans as slaves*
> This is similar to saying slavery happened in other places. It’s true that Africans did sell other Africans into slavery, but that doesn’t absolve Americans and Europeans for their participation in slavery.
> 
> In fact, suggesting as much erases a lot of nuance about power dynamics involved with how both Africans and Europeans were involved in the process.
> 
> As Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. wrote for the New York Times in 2010, "Slavery was a business, highly organized and lucrative for European buyers and sellers alike."
> 
> But slavery in the US wasn’t exactly business as usual. Barbara Ransby, a historian at the University of
> of Illinois at Chicago, noted for Colorlines that the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade exploited existing practices like selling prisoners of war into slavery to usher in "a heinous and brutal system that rested squarely on the dual pillars of white supremacy and ruthless capitalist greed."
> 
> Ramsey showcased the major takeaway from this historical fact: "It just means that West Africans also have a history to reckon with, just like us and every modern celebrity that thinks blackface is a joke."
> 
> *So why do people still try to justify slavery today?*
> It turns out a lot of it has to do with the fact that America’s mythic greatness is inextricably tied to the atrocities of slavery Americans try to sweep under the rug.
> 
> Being honest about slavery, Ramsey said, forces us to grapple with the fact that our founding fathers who fought for freedom from Britain’s tyranny hypocritically kept an entire population in bondage. Additionally, recognizing slavery means addressing the systemic inequalities that have stayed with us long after its abolition.
> 
> "The blatant forms of racism we still see today, from disenfranchising black voters to police brutality, are rooted in the fact that people were brought here against their will and treated like they were subhuman," Ramsey said.
> 
> Acting like this isn’t the case isn’t a solution.
> 
> "We can’t keep ignoring and mythologizing slavery just because facing it head-on makes us feel bad," Ramsey said. "Part of the healing comes from facing it."
> 
> Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.
> 
> 
> 
> Slavery is indefensible today but it is an integral part in the formation of our country and the economy of the south would never have grown without slave labor.
> 
> You also have to understand it in the context of the times, it was a common preactice, but we clung to it long after much of the world ended it.
> 
> It utterly flummoxes me that people believe they were happy and well fed. People in a country that values freedom and liberty above all else (eccentric maybe guns).  Says something about a rather ugly underbelly that is feeling empowered to come out in the open.
Click to expand...


They say it to rationalize their cognitive biases, nothing more.


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackSand said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fixed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps that will work out better for them ...
> 
> The only real fact is that the oppressed always have something in common.
> They refused to fight in order to secure their freedom and general welfare.
> 
> .​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /-----/ Which begs the question, If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We'll just look for any straw we can.
Click to expand...

Not to mention a display of abysmal world ignorance, the assumption that all of Africa was United on racial lines instead of thousands of nations and tribes with their own self interest.


----------



## Coyote

*Guys, this thread is in Zone 2, that means there is a topic.  Discuss it please.*


----------



## Coyote

BlackSand said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /-----/ Which begs the question, If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's no question to really beg.
> 
> It doesn't matter who sold who to whom if human slavery is the trade.
> To me ... You cannot justify human slavery through any measure.
> 
> But by issuance of that ... It is assumed I would fight slavery in general ...
> As well as fight and possibly die before allowing someone to make me a slave.
> 
> In one way or another ... Slavery involves compliance by the slave (brutal, forced, coerced or whatever).
> 
> .​
Click to expand...


Compliance assumes there is a choice...in theory yes.  In reality, most people are brutally broken.


----------



## Coyote

karpenter said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
> 
> 
> 
> HA-HARR !!
> No Wonder No One With Even Half A Brain Listens
> Didn't You Also Post This Contradictory Evidence ??
> The Story of Africa| BBC World Service
> Or Was That Your Buddy...
> 
> It Doesn't Matter
> Slaves Are Chattel To Be Sold And Bought
> No Matter Who Owns Them
> 
> '...would sell our own brothers and sisters?'...
> The Black Owners/Traders In America Sure Did
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Supposedly only whites lie about history, it appears the Africans dont want to admit their ancestors roles in slavery
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slavery In The United States Happened In A Bubble
> All By It Self
> 
> Slavery Didn't Exist
> Until America Went To Africa And Invented It
Click to expand...

Is this somehow supposed to mitigate our role in the slave industry?  Which continued after the Mid-Atlantic trade was abolished?  Maybe we need to own our responsibility in this sordid part of American history and move on instead of flailing around and spreading blame to relatively minor characters in the drama.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> This ended 150 years ago.
> 
> Rather than focusing in it why not focus on the problems of today?  Reparations won’t fix any problems, aren’t truly just in that they don’t go to those who were actually enslaved, and will only exacerbate racial hate because there will be those who will see it as just another entitlement reserved for blacks?
Click to expand...


This is in response to what people are saying. Reparations will fix many of the problems if not all. I'd certainly like to see all these entitlements blacks have and are reserved for us? Coyote do you not understand that entitlements have been allowed mainly for whites? I believe you are a fair minded person, so can you explain to me why whites are so willing to ignore everything they have been given and continue getting in order to complain about basically non existent entitlements for blacks?


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> This ended 150 years ago.
> 
> Rather than focusing in it why not focus on the problems of today?  Reparations won’t fix any problems, aren’t truly just in that they don’t go to those who were actually enslaved, and will only exacerbate racial hate because there will be those who will see it as just another entitlement reserved for blacks?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is in response to what people are saying. Reparations will fix many of the problems if not all. I'd certainly like to see all these entitlements blacks have and are reserved for us? Coyote do you not understand that entitlements have been allowed mainly for whites? I believe you are a fair minded person, so can you explain to me why whites are so willing to ignore everything they have been given and continue getting in order to complain about basically non existent entitlements for blacks?
Click to expand...


What exactly will reparations fix and for whom?

You don’t even have a reasonable way of determine who should get it and none of the projected recipients were directly affected by slavery.


----------



## Andylusion

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
Click to expand...


It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.


----------



## Coyote

Andylusion said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
Click to expand...

The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.


----------



## karpenter

Coyote said:
			
		

> Is this somehow supposed to mitigate our role in the slave industry?  Which continued after the Mid-Atlantic trade was abolished?


If The Nation Abolished The Practice
And Took Part In An International Blockaide Of The African Coast
How Is It The Nation's Guilt
That Criminals Attempted To Continue ??

This Is No More National Shame
Than The Rum-Runners Of Prohibition


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.
> *
> On the latest episode of her MTV web series _Decoded,_ comedian and activist Franchesca Ramsey highlighted the unfortunate tendency many Americans have to ignore or erase the role slavery played in the country’s past.
> 
> "We talk about race a lot on this show," Ramsey said. "But thanks to our current election cycle, _apparently_ we have to go back to the beginning to shed some light on the myths people use to justify slavery."
> 
> After Michelle Obama’s DNC speech about her historical legacy as the first black first lady "living in a house built by slaves," slavery fact-checking ensued. The first lady’s statement checked out.
> 
> But the fact that people tried to suggest otherwise shows just how little many Americans know about an institution that defined the country at its inception, and how that ignorance prevents us from taking an honest look at the country’s horrific past.
> 
> In response, Ramsey broke down five of the most common excuses used for slavery.
> 
> *1) "Slaves were well-fed"*
> After the first lady tried to use her DNC speech to show that her time in the White House demonstrated how far racial progress in America has come, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly decided to use her moment to put a positive spin on slavery itself.
> 
> The following day, O’Reilly challenged Obama on _The O’Reilly Factor_, saying "slaves were well-fed." Then, after a backlash, he defended his statement by clarifying that slaves’ diet consisted of "meat, bread, and other staples."
> 
> Ramsey cited other common arguments that parallel O’Reilly’s, like the idea that some slave masters treated slaves well or that being a slave who worked in the big house was at least better than working outside in the fields.
> 
> But, as Ramsey noted, "this argument is immaterial, as in it doesn’t matter."
> 
> No matter their housing or food, the inherent problem with slavery is the fact that people were slaves in the first place, which is only compounded by the ways Africans were taken from their countries of origin and transported to an unknown place against their will where no one was required to muster even an ounce of recognition of their humanity.
> 
> "If aliens abducted your brother, sister, and favorite uncle, and stuck a feeding tube down their throats, while forcing them to build their emperor’s house, would you think, ‘Well at least the aliens fed my family’?" Ramsey asked on _Decoded_. "I don’t think so."
> 
> *2) Slaves were happy to have work*
> Slaves may have had many excruciating jobs, including building much of America. But that doesn’t mean it’s okay to equate slavery with employment.
> 
> "Newsflash: Although you might hate your job, slavery isn’t employment," Ramsey said. "It wasn’t voluntary, and it has no comparison to working at a job."
> 
> But even textbook publishers fail to get this fact straight.
> 
> Last October, McGraw-Hill Education came under fire after Roni Dean-Burren, the mother of a high school freshman in Texas, shared a photo of immigration patterns in her son’s geography textbook that said the slave trade "brought millions of workers" to the US through slavery from 1500s to the 1800s. But "workers" and slaves are not at all the same thing.
> 
> On _Decoded_, Ramsey explained the major difference: "Being forcibly taken from your home, put in shackles on a disease-infested ship, and forced to do hard labor from sunrise to sunset is not the same thing as clocking in at Starbucks, okay?"
> 
> *3) Other countries had slavery too*
> It’s true America wasn’t the only country that had slavery. In fact, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade’s name signals the scope of slave routes, which traveled from the shores of West and Central Africa to the Caribbean before stopping in the US.
> 
> Many of the people (nearly 4 million) taken from Africa to be slaves between the 16th and 19th centuries ended up in Brazil because the slavery conditions in Brazil were so brutal that continued importation was essential to make up for the high death rate, which outpaced birth rate.
> 
> But slavery elsewhere doesn’t change the fact that slavery in the US was still wrong.
> 
> "Even if slavery was common practice when America was doing it, it doesn’t make it right," Ramsey said. "Slavery is bad, and it was always bad, everywhere, no matter who’s doing it!"
> 
> *4) The Irish in America were also slaves*
> Some people believe the Irish in America were also slaves because the Irish, historically, have faced persecution and many came to the US as indentured servants.
> 
> Ramsay’s response is simple: "No, they were not."
> 
> Ramsey has discredited this idea before. But that doesn’t change the fact that it has become a fixture for racist right-wing internet trolls.
> 
> In an interview with the Southern Poverty Law Center, Liam Hogan, an Irish historian, explained that the myth of Irish slaves "broadly claims that indentured servitude and penal servitude can be equated with racialized perpetual hereditary chattel slavery."
> 
> The point is to try to deflect the reality of black people’s enslavement in the US by mythologizing a group of white people who were also slaves.
> 
> But Ramsey underlined the main problem with this approach: "Class, let’s say this one together: Persecution is bad, but not the same as slavery!"
> 
> *5) Africans sold other Africans as slaves*
> This is similar to saying slavery happened in other places. It’s true that Africans did sell other Africans into slavery, but that doesn’t absolve Americans and Europeans for their participation in slavery.
> 
> In fact, suggesting as much erases a lot of nuance about power dynamics involved with how both Africans and Europeans were involved in the process.
> 
> As Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. wrote for the New York Times in 2010, "Slavery was a business, highly organized and lucrative for European buyers and sellers alike."
> 
> But slavery in the US wasn’t exactly business as usual. Barbara Ransby, a historian at the University of
> of Illinois at Chicago, noted for Colorlines that the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade exploited existing practices like selling prisoners of war into slavery to usher in "a heinous and brutal system that rested squarely on the dual pillars of white supremacy and ruthless capitalist greed."
> 
> Ramsey showcased the major takeaway from this historical fact: "It just means that West Africans also have a history to reckon with, just like us and every modern celebrity that thinks blackface is a joke."
> 
> *So why do people still try to justify slavery today?*
> It turns out a lot of it has to do with the fact that America’s mythic greatness is inextricably tied to the atrocities of slavery Americans try to sweep under the rug.
> 
> Being honest about slavery, Ramsey said, forces us to grapple with the fact that our founding fathers who fought for freedom from Britain’s tyranny hypocritically kept an entire population in bondage. Additionally, recognizing slavery means addressing the systemic inequalities that have stayed with us long after its abolition.
> 
> "The blatant forms of racism we still see today, from disenfranchising black voters to police brutality, are rooted in the fact that people were brought here against their will and treated like they were subhuman," Ramsey said.
> 
> Acting like this isn’t the case isn’t a solution.
> 
> "We can’t keep ignoring and mythologizing slavery just because facing it head-on makes us feel bad," Ramsey said. "Part of the healing comes from facing it."
> 
> Why are people still defending slavery in America? 5 common excuses, debunked.
> 
> 
> 
> Slavery is indefensible today but it is an integral part in the formation of our country and the economy of the south would never have grown without slave labor.
> 
> You also have to understand it in the context of the times, it was a common preactice, but we clung to it long after much of the world ended it.
> 
> It utterly flummoxes me that people believe they were happy and well fed. People in a country that values freedom and liberty above all else (except maybe guns).  Says something about a rather ugly underbelly that is feeling empowered to come out in the open.
Click to expand...


Slavery was an integral part of the American economy. North and south grew because of it.


----------



## IM2

toobfreak said:


> DarkFury said:
> 
> 
> 
> *NOT ONE DIME.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lessee, minimum wage labour was worth about a penny an hour in 1850.  Subtract from that the housing, food, clothes, healthcare and everything else that blacks got for free, what their families were paid who sold them into slavery, a lot of them might still end up owing us something.  If anyone can prove they are the rightful descendant of a slave and have records of hours they worked, benefits, etc., upon which to make a case, they might just end up being pursued by the IRS instead for unpaid debt to the United States.  All slave descendants making claims for "reparations" please step forward and make your case so the IRS can talk to you.
Click to expand...


That penny was worth how much in todays dollars?

The standard dumb white retort. You have no argument.


----------



## karpenter

IM2 said:
			
		

> Slavery was an integral part of the American economy. North and south grew because of it.


And Slavery Was One Of The African's Most Time-Honored Traditions

Until The Quakers In Europe
Came Up With The Revolutionary Idea
That Slavery Is Immoral

No Thanx Needed
You're Welcome...


----------



## toobfreak

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them*
> 
> 
> 
> This ended 150 years ago. Rather than focusing in it why not focus on the problems of today?  Reparations won’t fix any problems, aren’t truly just in that they don’t go to those who were actually enslaved, and will only exacerbate racial hate because there will be those who will see it as just another entitlement reserved for blacks?
Click to expand...


*EXACTLY RIGHT. * I doubt few here KNOWS they are descended from slaves, who those people were and actual details of their lives.  Further, I bet everyone here has had injustices in their lives or that of their parents, much less their great great great great cousin.  So everyone has a case to be owed something.  Slavery was AT LEAST 5 generations ago, so anyone today that is related to slaves is likely less than 6% of their bloodline related to people who were actual pre-CW slaves.

If history tells us anything, it is that those seeking reparations now are really only looking for a foot in the door-- -- once reparations are paid, those paid would now only feel more empowered, more angry, demanding yet more.  Blacks have been making demands for 150 years and getting most of what they wanted, yet are angrier now today than ever!

Where does it stop, with great, great grandfathers?  Grand uncles?  Grand cousins?  And once you open the door for slavery, others will then demand reparations for other things:  innocents killed in a war, treaties broken, the list is endless.  The world is FULL of injustice;  why should Blacks be the only ones repaid for injustices?

Further, if anything is owed, it isn't by the people of today, but by the slave OWNERS.  Are there any businesses, industries, companies or farms, etc., that are directly descended from slave-owning entities?  You might want to petition them, but then, if your grandfather robbed a bank or killed someone, can they hold YOU responsible?  Is the great, great grandson of Jesse James responsible for his crimes?  If not, then there's your answer:  NO ONE today owes anything for crimes of long ago.  If ever there was any case, it should have been made immediately after the Civil War.


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
Click to expand...

My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.


----------



## karpenter

toobfreak said:
			
		

> *EXACTLY RIGHT. *I doubt few here KNOWS they are descended from slaves


My Wife Watches That Gate's Ancestry Show On PBS
Just About Everyone Seems To Share African Blood

So Who Is Going To Be Responsible For Paying Reparations
If Gate's Average Research Is True ??


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> This ended 150 years ago.
> 
> Rather than focusing in it why not focus on the problems of today?  Reparations won’t fix any problems, aren’t truly just in that they don’t go to those who were actually enslaved, and will only exacerbate racial hate because there will be those who will see it as just another entitlement reserved for blacks?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is in response to what people are saying. Reparations will fix many of the problems if not all. I'd certainly like to see all these entitlements blacks have and are reserved for us? Coyote do you not understand that entitlements have been allowed mainly for whites? I believe you are a fair minded person, so can you explain to me why whites are so willing to ignore everything they have been given and continue getting in order to complain about basically non existent entitlements for blacks?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What exactly will reparations fix and for whom?
> 
> You don’t even have a reasonable way of determine who should get it and none of the projected recipients were directly affected by slavery.
Click to expand...


It will provide the necessary capital to revitalize black communities, provide venture capital to aspiring back entrepreneurs, increase financial assistance for people wanting post secondary and adult education and training. You really are not thinking wen you make  your opinions Coyote. Hate to tell you but we are descendants of slaves and are owed for that labor. But you see Coyote those who are actively researching the matter are not just limiting this to slavery nor did the U.N. These entities are talking about reparations from at least 1776 until right now. You don't know even how we are taking about using the reparation money much less trying to tell me what and how we don't have this and that.

Now would you show me the courtesy to answer my questions?

I'd certainly like to see all these entitlements blacks have and are reserved for us? Coyote do you not understand that entitlements have been allowed mainly for whites? I believe you are a fair minded person, so can you explain to me why whites are so willing to ignore everything they have been given and continue getting in order to complain about basically non existent entitlements for blacks?


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
Click to expand...


Totally incorrect.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
Click to expand...

Totally correct.

I’ve been wondering about a couple of your statements and underlying premise.
You say that you ran organizations, retired at 52 and get paid handsomely for lending guidance.

You also claim that Blacks don’t have the same opportunities as Whites and need special consideration.

Which one of your statements is false? Or both?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think reparations are a fine line.  For instance not all states legalized slavery.  Reparation should really be for survivors not descendents hundreds of years later.
> 
> Government programs designed to address racial inequality and discrimination really are a form of reparation and an attempt to address longstanding policies and attitudes that targeted blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Have you studied Cobell v Salazar so you can understand how you are paying Native American descendants now for things that happened because of the Dawes Act if 1887? There has been nothing that has addressed the economic damage specifically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your ancestors sold family members; you can't handle that?  Tough.
> You've had equal rights since the 1960s and you still can't live without going to the bar and getting a daily dose of under the panties satisfaction.
> If you can't straighten out your act don't expect others to give you hand outs that you''ll simply spend on clothes and use to upgrade from BMWs to Roll Royces.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since none of that happened you just show yourself to be another dumb white person.
Click to expand...

You do realize that Whitey and Hispaniky are well aware that Blacks are revising history.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade*
> By Dwayne Wong (Omowale)
> 
> There are many misconceptions about African history and nowhere is this more true than the topic of the slave trade. Very often I see comments by people who argue that Africans sold each other into slavery. There is some element of truth to this, but to speak of the slave trade solely as Africans selling each other t is a gross oversimplification of what was a complex historical event. *This also seems to be an attempt to shift the burden of the slave trade on the victims of that very trade. In How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Walter Rodney mentions how the white author of a book on the slave trade admitted that he was encouraged by other scholars to blame the slave trade solely on the Africans. This narrative helps to lessen European guilt by making Africans seem just as or even more guilty of being involved in the slave trade.* This piece is not an attempt to ignore the African role in the slave trade or to absolve those that were involved, but to to provide a more complete picture of the African involvement in slave trade.
> 
> *In the first place, the Portuguese initiated what eventually became the Trans-Atlantic slave trade mainly through slave raids along the coasts of Africa. The first of these raids came in 1444 and was led by Lançarote de Freitas. The problem with raiding for slaves was that it was extremely dangerous. For instance, the slave trader Nuno Tristão was killed during an ambush. Slave raiding proved to be an extremely dangerous way to obtain slaves, but buying slaves was much safer and took less effort on the part of the Europeans. Therefore, the first phase of the slave trade began not with a trade, but with a series of raids. This point is especially important because although the slave trade was on some levels based on a partnership between European buyers and African traders, the slave trade did not begin as such.*
> 
> *Moreover, the partnership between the traders and buyers was an uneasy one. The European slave traders often betrayed those who supplied them with slaves. A famous case of this was the African slave trader Daaga who was tricked and captured by slave traders. He was taken to Trinidad where he would eventually lead a mutiny. Another example is given by Anne Bailey in her book African Voices in the Atlantic Slave Trade. She mentions the story of Chief Ndorkutsu who had been providing captives to the European traders. Eventually some of the Ndorkutsu’s own relatives were tricked into boarding a slave ship and then taken as slaves to Cuba. In some cases, such as that of Madam Tinubu in Nigeria and Afonso of the Kongo Kingdom, those Africans that initially gave African captives to the Europeans came to resist the slave trade. Tinubu had a change of heart when she realized how inhumanely the slaves were treated. Afonso was almost assassinated by the Portuguese after he demanded an end to the slave trade in his kingdom.*
> 
> *Typically wars in West Africa were relatively short affairs that left a small number of causalities. The introduction of European weapons made these wars more drawn out and destructive affairs. Moreover, the only way Africans could acquire these firearms was through the trade of slaves. A king of Dahomey once requested that Europeans establish a firearms factory in his nation, but this request went ignored. Firearms became necessary for African nations to defend themselves both from African rivals as well as from European intrusion, but the only way to acquire these weapons was through the slave trade. This situation only benefited the competing European powers that were able to play Africans against each other.*
> 
> Finally, the slave trade left a negative legacy on both sides of the Atlantic. The Africans that were brought to the Americas were forced to labor as slaves, while enduring some of the most inhumane treatment imaginable. Those who remained, however, were left to mourn the lost of their friends and relatives that were taken away. *A handful of African traders and rulers may have gained some wealth from the slave trade, but overall it was a very negative event for Africa. There were African kingdoms, such as the Kongo Kingdom, that eventually fell due to the onslaught brought about by the slave trade.* We often think of the negative impact that the slave trade had on those who were captured, but the slave trade was also devastating for those who escaped being captured as well.
> 
> Some Africans did play a role in the slave trade and the trade could not have been as large as it was without cooperation from Africans. With that being said, *I think many people who have not properly studied the slave trade have a tendency to overstate how involved Africans were in a misguided attempt to shift the blame of the slave trade on Africans.*
> 
> —
> 
> _Dwayne is the author of several books on the history and experiences of African people, both on the continent and in the diaspora. His books are available through Amazon. You can also follow Dwayne on Facebook._
> 
> Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade | HuffPost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh----ok ----the very BEST you could do   "some people overstate how involved Africans were....." ? ----<<< really impressive.    Your citation is silly---it dates the INCEPTION OF THE CONCEPT OF SLAVERY  to
> 1444  AD<<<<<<<<<  *ROFLMAO*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some will do anything to deny the truth. You are really dumb. Learn how to read.
> 
> *"In the first place, the Portuguese initiated what eventually became the Trans-Atlantic slave trade mainly through slave raids along the coasts of Africa. The first of these raids came in 1444 and was led by Lançarote de Freitas. "*
> 
> It is apparent to anyone who can read that the author was referring to the Trans Atlantic slave trade. Your excuse laden argument about things happening 10,000 yeas ago is quite frankly, ignorant.
Click to expand...

It just occurred to me...
When are you going to organize a rally against all the current slavery of Blacks in Africa by Black African War Lords and the Arab World by non-White Arabs?
You're so full of crap.


----------



## BlackSand

Coyote said:


> Compliance assumes there is a choice...in theory yes.  In reality, most people are brutally broken.



_*"We are all dying ... But not all of us will die today"*
_
It's always a choice ... Not a matter of theory, statistics nor odds ... 
The results are reality ... Whether they consist of desire or simply consequence.

Reparations are another story and judged on a completely different scale.​


.​


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> This ended 150 years ago.
> 
> Rather than focusing in it why not focus on the problems of today?  Reparations won’t fix any problems, aren’t truly just in that they don’t go to those who were actually enslaved, and will only exacerbate racial hate because there will be those who will see it as just another entitlement reserved for blacks?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is in response to what people are saying. Reparations will fix many of the problems if not all. I'd certainly like to see all these entitlements blacks have and are reserved for us? Coyote do you not understand that entitlements have been allowed mainly for whites? I believe you are a fair minded person, so can you explain to me why whites are so willing to ignore everything they have been given and continue getting in order to complain about basically non existent entitlements for blacks?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What exactly will reparations fix and for whom?
> 
> You don’t even have a reasonable way of determine who should get it and none of the projected recipients were directly affected by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *It will provide the necessary capital to revitalize black communities, provide venture capital to aspiring back entrepreneurs, increase financial assistance for people wanting post secondary and adult education and training.* You really are not thinking wen you make  your opinions Coyote. Hate to tell you but we are descendants of slaves and are owed for that labor. But you see Coyote those who are actively researching the matter are not just limiting this to slavery nor did the U.N. These entities are talking about reparations from at least 1776 until right now. You don't know even how we are taking about using the reparation money much less trying to tell me what and how we don't have this and that.
Click to expand...


Actually I am thinking.

First off, you've been talking about reparations - payments made to individuals.  Historically that has not translated into capital improvements of any kind - witness what people did when they got lump sum tax payments.  They spend it on themselves - usually goods, vacations, debt.  How much went into community development?

You are  not all descendents of slaves - many also immigrated here post slavery.   Note:  not all of us are descendents of slave owners either.

You, individually are not owed for labor - none of you, because you were not slaves and you have been paid for your labor, you have no right to be paid for other people's labor.

It sounds like you are talking about massive OPEN ENDED reparations...so where is all that money going to come from?



> Now would you show me the courtesy to answer my questions?



I have always tried to answer your questions.



> I'd certainly like to see all these entitlements blacks have and are reserved for us?



Affirmative action has benefited blacks and women, you can't deny that.  And though legally it must be race neutral, has it benefited white males in any way?  At the very least it LOOKS that way to many Americans.



> Coyote do you not understand that entitlements have been allowed mainly for whites? I believe you are a fair minded person, so can you explain to me why whites are so willing to ignore everything they have been given and continue getting in order to complain about basically non existent entitlements for blacks?



What "entitlements" are only allowed mainly for whites?


----------



## Coyote

I think reparations are the wrong way to go about rectifying old wrongs - it is impossible to apply them in a just way because none of the people alive today were either enslaved or slavers.

It seems it would be better to look at what actually needs to be addressed rather than payments to individuals:
Education
Housing
Neighborhood deterioration
Home ownership

Grants can be given to communities to empower them.  Grants can be given to individual entrepeneurs who come up with good ideas.  Education in failing areas can be opened to entrepeneural ideas by the people who actually live there.  I don't know but that seems like a better way of handling it.


----------



## Coyote

karpenter said:


> toobfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXACTLY RIGHT. *I doubt few here KNOWS they are descended from slaves
> 
> 
> 
> My Wife Watches That Gate's Ancestry Show On PBS
> Just About Everyone Seems To Share African Blood
> 
> So Who Is Going To Be Responsible For Paying Reparations
> If Gate's Average Research Is True ??
Click to expand...


Exactly - it's overly broad, we can't even define who should be getting it.


----------



## karpenter

IM2 said:
			
		

> It will provide the necessary capital to revitalize black communities, provide venture capital to aspiring back entrepreneurs, increase financial assistance for people wanting post secondary and adult education and training.


That's All A Very Noble Ideal

I Think It's More Likely
That Each Subsequent Generation Will Continue To Make Demands
Because I Don't See An Overall Inprovement
Based On The Stewardship Of Resources They Already Have 

What Seems To Be Oppressing Blacks The Most
Is Apathy With An Expectation Of Failure
And Excuses Compounded By A Culture Of Victim-Hood

Something Needs To Be Done
About The Near 75% Illegitimate Birth Rate
And Return Of The Fathers To The Family

No One Else Can Fix That For Them


----------



## Indeependent

dave p said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> oh----ok ----the very BEST you could do   "some people overstate how involved Africans were....." ? ----<<< really impressive.    Your citation is silly---it dates the INCEPTION OF THE CONCEPT OF SLAVERY  to
> 1444  AD<<<<<<<<<  *ROFLMAO*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some will do anything to deny the truth. You are really dumb. Learn how to read.
> 
> *"In the first place, the Portuguese initiated what eventually became the Trans-Atlantic slave trade mainly through slave raids along the coasts of Africa. The first of these raids came in 1444 and was led by Lançarote de Freitas. "*
> 
> It is apparent to anyone who can read that the author was referring to the Trans Atlantic slave trade. Your excuse laden argument about things happening 10,000 yeas ago is quite frankly, ignorant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It just occurred to me...
> When are you going to organize a rally against all the current slavery of Blacks in Africa by Black African War Lords and the Arab World by non-White Arabs?
> You're so full of crap.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Reading im2’s posts are like watching a train wreck. You know you shouldn’t but you just can’t look away for fear you will miss something. In both cases that something we will see is either abhorrent or foolish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I often wonder if IM2 and AssLips are the same psycho.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Reading the posts is like watching an accident. You know you shouldn’t but you can’t help yourself. You can’t help but think what’s next?
Click to expand...

I wonder what happens Whitey runs out of money?
Whitey become slaves!


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
Click to expand...


Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.

And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.


----------



## karpenter

Coyote said:
			
		

> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.


The Smartest Road To Personal Success
Has Always Been To Run From That Reservation


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
Click to expand...

I never asserted that Native Americans were given reparations.


----------



## Indeependent

The Native Americans were allowed to open their well run casinos and many have made a fortune.


----------



## dave p

Indeependent said:


> The Native Americans were allowed to open their well run casinos and many have made a fortune.


Unfortunately not all tribes have been recognized. The ones that haven’t are not allowed the same opportunities.


----------



## Indeependent

dave p said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Native Americans were allowed to open their well run casinos and many have made a fortune.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately not all tribes have been recognized. The ones that haven’t are not allowed the same opportunities.
Click to expand...

Not every member of every segment of society can get their act together.
Being an Observant Jew I know that not every Jew is a millionaire...I'm not.
I know Jews with a zero IQ who are literally billionaires and Jews who are geniuses and are poor.


----------



## dave p

Indeependent said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Native Americans were allowed to open their well run casinos and many have made a fortune.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately not all tribes have been recognized. The ones that haven’t are not allowed the same opportunities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not every member of every segment of society can get their act together.
> Being an Observant Jew I know that not every Jew is a millionaire...I'm not.
> I know Jews with a zero IQ who are literally billionaires and Jews who are geniuses and are poor.
Click to expand...

I agree. The Native injustice is close to me since my wife is 100%. Just as the atrocities perpetrated to Jews are close to you.


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> 
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never asserted that Native Americans were given reparations.
Click to expand...


IM2 has, he was who I was responding to.


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Native Americans were allowed to open their well run casinos and many have made a fortune.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately not all tribes have been recognized. The ones that haven’t are not allowed the same opportunities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not every member of every segment of society can get their act together.
> Being an Observant Jew I know that not every Jew is a millionaire...I'm not.
> I know Jews with a zero IQ who are literally billionaires and Jews who are geniuses and are poor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree. The Native injustice is close to me since my wife is 100%. Just as the atrocities perpetrated to Jews are close to you.
Click to expand...


And...I would add the atrocities committed to blacks in regards to civil rights, which are still in living memory and the legacy of slavery.  All that is still very much alive.


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> 
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never asserted that Native Americans were given reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> IM2 has, he was who I was responding to.
Click to expand...

My apologies


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Native Americans were allowed to open their well run casinos and many have made a fortune.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately not all tribes have been recognized. The ones that haven’t are not allowed the same opportunities.
Click to expand...

  It's also going to be diluted now, with the increased legalization of casinos and gambling...

Some have done well with natural resources on tribal lands, but despite that many reservations are the poorest places in the country and it's shameful.


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Native Americans were allowed to open their well run casinos and many have made a fortune.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately not all tribes have been recognized. The ones that haven’t are not allowed the same opportunities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not every member of every segment of society can get their act together.
> Being an Observant Jew I know that not every Jew is a millionaire...I'm not.
> I know Jews with a zero IQ who are literally billionaires and Jews who are geniuses and are poor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree. The Native injustice is close to me since my wife is 100%. Just as the atrocities perpetrated to Jews are close to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And...I would add the atrocities committed to blacks in regards to civil rights, which are still in living memory and the legacy of slavery.  All that is still very much alive.
Click to expand...

The atrocities to Native Americans were a direct result of Government activity and Government policies. Our Government specifically directed the army to slaughter Native Americans. The largest mass shooting in history happened to Native Americans and was directed by the U.S. Government while Abraham Lincoln was in office. The  government never did that to Blacks. Our Government stole the Native Americans land. That was not the case with Blacks. As far as the Jees are concerned, the German Government systematically murdered thousand of Jews. Any other race they deemed inferior. One cannot compare the treatment of Native Americans directly by our Government to what happened with Blacks. It is apples and oranges.


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Native Americans were allowed to open their well run casinos and many have made a fortune.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately not all tribes have been recognized. The ones that haven’t are not allowed the same opportunities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not every member of every segment of society can get their act together.
> Being an Observant Jew I know that not every Jew is a millionaire...I'm not.
> I know Jews with a zero IQ who are literally billionaires and Jews who are geniuses and are poor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree. The Native injustice is close to me since my wife is 100%. Just as the atrocities perpetrated to Jews are close to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And...I would add the atrocities committed to blacks in regards to civil rights, which are still in living memory and the legacy of slavery.  All that is still very much alive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The atrocities to Native Americans were a direct result of Government activity and Government policies. Our Government specifically directed the army to slaughter Native Americans. The largest mass shooting in history happened to Native Americans and was directed by the U.S. Government while Abraham Lincoln was in office. The  government never did that to Blacks. Our Government stole the Native Americans land. That was not the case with Blacks. As far as the Jees are concerned, the German Government systematically murdered thousand of Jews. Any other race they deemed inferior. One cannot compare the treatment of Native Americans directly by our Government to what happened with Blacks. It is apples and oranges.
Click to expand...


I agree with you on the atrocities to Native Americans.  I totally disagree on the atrocities to blacks.  Blacks couldn't own land. They were owned property themselves.  They could be killed, whipped, starved and raped with inpunity.  Families were forcably seperated on the auction block. They were lynched for looking at a white woman.  They were used, without their consent in horrible medical experiments.  And it was all legal.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
Click to expand...


Native Americans DO get reparations.


the making of amends for wrong or injury done: reparation for an injustice.
Usually *reparations.* compensation in money, material, labor, etc., payable by a defeated country to another country or to an individual for loss suffered during or as a result of war.
restoration to good condition.


----------



## Coyote

How Black Slaves Were Routinely Sold As ‘Specimens’ To Ambitious White Doctors

6 More Experiments on Slaves and Blacks You Just Might Not Know About


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Native Americans were allowed to open their well run casinos and many have made a fortune.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately not all tribes have been recognized. The ones that haven’t are not allowed the same opportunities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not every member of every segment of society can get their act together.
> Being an Observant Jew I know that not every Jew is a millionaire...I'm not.
> I know Jews with a zero IQ who are literally billionaires and Jews who are geniuses and are poor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree. The Native injustice is close to me since my wife is 100%. Just as the atrocities perpetrated to Jews are close to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And...I would add the atrocities committed to blacks in regards to civil rights, which are still in living memory and the legacy of slavery.  All that is still very much alive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The atrocities to Native Americans were a direct result of Government activity and Government policies. Our Government specifically directed the army to slaughter Native Americans. The largest mass shooting in history happened to Native Americans and was directed by the U.S. Government while Abraham Lincoln was in office. The  government never did that to Blacks. Our Government stole the Native Americans land. That was not the case with Blacks. As far as the Jees are concerned, the German Government systematically murdered thousand of Jews. Any other race they deemed inferior. One cannot compare the treatment of Native Americans directly by our Government to what happened with Blacks. It is apples and oranges.
Click to expand...


Bullshit!


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> 
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Native Americans DO get reparations.
> 
> 
> the making of amends for wrong or injury done: reparation for an injustice.
> Usually *reparations.* compensation in money, material, labor, etc., payable by a defeated country to another country or to an individual for loss suffered during or as a result of war.
> restoration to good condition.
Click to expand...


No.  They do not.  We are talking about reparations in the meaning of #1.


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately not all tribes have been recognized. The ones that haven’t are not allowed the same opportunities.
> 
> 
> 
> Not every member of every segment of society can get their act together.
> Being an Observant Jew I know that not every Jew is a millionaire...I'm not.
> I know Jews with a zero IQ who are literally billionaires and Jews who are geniuses and are poor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree. The Native injustice is close to me since my wife is 100%. Just as the atrocities perpetrated to Jews are close to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And...I would add the atrocities committed to blacks in regards to civil rights, which are still in living memory and the legacy of slavery.  All that is still very much alive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The atrocities to Native Americans were a direct result of Government activity and Government policies. Our Government specifically directed the army to slaughter Native Americans. The largest mass shooting in history happened to Native Americans and was directed by the U.S. Government while Abraham Lincoln was in office. The  government never did that to Blacks. Our Government stole the Native Americans land. That was not the case with Blacks. As far as the Jees are concerned, the German Government systematically murdered thousand of Jews. Any other race they deemed inferior. One cannot compare the treatment of Native Americans directly by our Government to what happened with Blacks. It is apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree with you on the atrocities to Native Americans.  I totally disagree on the atrocities to blacks.  Blacks couldn't own land. They were owned property themselves.  They could be killed, whipped, starved and raped with inpunity.  Families were forcably seperated on the auction block. They were lynched for looking at a white woman.  They were used, without their consent in horrible medical experiments.  And it was all legal.
Click to expand...

I agree they were treated badly and the whole incident is an atrocity. However it was not directed by the U.S. government. The Governent that did, the confederate stars of America no longer exists. Slavery was more or less individual in nature. The money paid to purchase slaves was paid by individuals to other individuals in some cases to foreign Governments. Laws unfortunately did not go far enough to protect them. However the playing field has been rectified and the opportunities afforded to Whites are also afforded to Blacks. Some specific laws favor Blacks. The idea of reparations on top of what has been done is quite frankly ridiculous.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> 
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Native Americans DO get reparations.
> 
> 
> the making of amends for wrong or injury done: reparation for an injustice.
> Usually *reparations.* compensation in money, material, labor, etc., payable by a defeated country to another country or to an individual for loss suffered during or as a result of war.
> restoration to good condition.
Click to expand...

Not every tribe has been recognized. Most have been left out.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately not all tribes have been recognized. The ones that haven’t are not allowed the same opportunities.
> 
> 
> 
> Not every member of every segment of society can get their act together.
> Being an Observant Jew I know that not every Jew is a millionaire...I'm not.
> I know Jews with a zero IQ who are literally billionaires and Jews who are geniuses and are poor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree. The Native injustice is close to me since my wife is 100%. Just as the atrocities perpetrated to Jews are close to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And...I would add the atrocities committed to blacks in regards to civil rights, which are still in living memory and the legacy of slavery.  All that is still very much alive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The atrocities to Native Americans were a direct result of Government activity and Government policies. Our Government specifically directed the army to slaughter Native Americans. The largest mass shooting in history happened to Native Americans and was directed by the U.S. Government while Abraham Lincoln was in office. The  government never did that to Blacks. Our Government stole the Native Americans land. That was not the case with Blacks. As far as the Jees are concerned, the German Government systematically murdered thousand of Jews. Any other race they deemed inferior. One cannot compare the treatment of Native Americans directly by our Government to what happened with Blacks. It is apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bullshit!
Click to expand...

How eloquent! However I am 100% correct.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> 
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Native Americans DO get reparations.
> 
> 
> the making of amends for wrong or injury done: reparation for an injustice.
> Usually *reparations.* compensation in money, material, labor, etc., payable by a defeated country to another country or to an individual for loss suffered during or as a result of war.
> restoration to good condition.
Click to expand...

What happened to the Native Americans and to Blacks was not a result of war.


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> 
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Native Americans DO get reparations.
> 
> 
> the making of amends for wrong or injury done: reparation for an injustice.
> Usually *reparations.* compensation in money, material, labor, etc., payable by a defeated country to another country or to an individual for loss suffered during or as a result of war.
> restoration to good condition.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not every tribe has been recognized. Most have been left out.
Click to expand...


True.


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not every member of every segment of society can get their act together.
> Being an Observant Jew I know that not every Jew is a millionaire...I'm not.
> I know Jews with a zero IQ who are literally billionaires and Jews who are geniuses and are poor.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. The Native injustice is close to me since my wife is 100%. Just as the atrocities perpetrated to Jews are close to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And...I would add the atrocities committed to blacks in regards to civil rights, which are still in living memory and the legacy of slavery.  All that is still very much alive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The atrocities to Native Americans were a direct result of Government activity and Government policies. Our Government specifically directed the army to slaughter Native Americans. The largest mass shooting in history happened to Native Americans and was directed by the U.S. Government while Abraham Lincoln was in office. The  government never did that to Blacks. Our Government stole the Native Americans land. That was not the case with Blacks. As far as the Jees are concerned, the German Government systematically murdered thousand of Jews. Any other race they deemed inferior. One cannot compare the treatment of Native Americans directly by our Government to what happened with Blacks. It is apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree with you on the atrocities to Native Americans.  I totally disagree on the atrocities to blacks.  Blacks couldn't own land. They were owned property themselves.  They could be killed, whipped, starved and raped with inpunity.  Families were forcably seperated on the auction block. They were lynched for looking at a white woman.  They were used, without their consent in horrible medical experiments.  And it was all legal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree they were treated badly and the whole incident is an atrocity. However it was not directed by the U.S. government. The Governent that did, the confederate stars of America no longer exists. Slavery was more or less individual in nature. The money paid to purchase slaves was paid by individuals to other individuals in some cases to foreign Governments. Laws unfortunately did not go far enough to protect them. However the playing field has been rectified and the opportunities afforded to Whites are also afforded to Blacks. Some specific laws favor Blacks. The idea of reparations on top of what has been done is quite frankly ridiculous.
Click to expand...


The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
Click to expand...

Opinions are like noses. Everybody has one. These threads will never convince anyone to change their mind. One can only expose their individual point of view. The only thing that matters and are relevant are the facts. I feel that the favys support my view, you feel the support yours.


----------



## Indeependent

Blacks refuse police enforcement.
They have schools which do not prepare them for college but heaven forbid they should enforce standards.
They need the bar and $500.00 sneakers.


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. The Native injustice is close to me since my wife is 100%. Just as the atrocities perpetrated to Jews are close to you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And...I would add the atrocities committed to blacks in regards to civil rights, which are still in living memory and the legacy of slavery.  All that is still very much alive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The atrocities to Native Americans were a direct result of Government activity and Government policies. Our Government specifically directed the army to slaughter Native Americans. The largest mass shooting in history happened to Native Americans and was directed by the U.S. Government while Abraham Lincoln was in office. The  government never did that to Blacks. Our Government stole the Native Americans land. That was not the case with Blacks. As far as the Jees are concerned, the German Government systematically murdered thousand of Jews. Any other race they deemed inferior. One cannot compare the treatment of Native Americans directly by our Government to what happened with Blacks. It is apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree with you on the atrocities to Native Americans.  I totally disagree on the atrocities to blacks.  Blacks couldn't own land. They were owned property themselves.  They could be killed, whipped, starved and raped with inpunity.  Families were forcably seperated on the auction block. They were lynched for looking at a white woman.  They were used, without their consent in horrible medical experiments.  And it was all legal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree they were treated badly and the whole incident is an atrocity. However it was not directed by the U.S. government. The Governent that did, the confederate stars of America no longer exists. Slavery was more or less individual in nature. The money paid to purchase slaves was paid by individuals to other individuals in some cases to foreign Governments. Laws unfortunately did not go far enough to protect them. However the playing field has been rectified and the opportunities afforded to Whites are also afforded to Blacks. Some specific laws favor Blacks. The idea of reparations on top of what has been done is quite frankly ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
Click to expand...

And have thusly been changed. However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Blacks refuse police enforcement.
> They have schools which do not prepare them for college but heaven forbid they should enforce standards.
> They need the bar and $500.00 sneakers.



Love those canards don't you?

Schools are not influenced by race but by  poverty etc.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blacks refuse police enforcement.
> They have schools which do not prepare them for college but heaven forbid they should enforce standards.
> They need the bar and $500.00 sneakers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
Click to expand...

I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
Where does your hands on knowledge come from?


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blacks refuse police enforcement.
> They have schools which do not prepare them for college but heaven forbid they should enforce standards.
> They need the bar and $500.00 sneakers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
Click to expand...


Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.

But more to the point, I can read and find resources.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blacks refuse police enforcement.
> They have schools which do not prepare them for college but heaven forbid they should enforce standards.
> They need the bar and $500.00 sneakers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
Click to expand...

So you know full well you’re full of it.


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...I would add the atrocities committed to blacks in regards to civil rights, which are still in living memory and the legacy of slavery.  All that is still very much alive.
> 
> 
> 
> The atrocities to Native Americans were a direct result of Government activity and Government policies. Our Government specifically directed the army to slaughter Native Americans. The largest mass shooting in history happened to Native Americans and was directed by the U.S. Government while Abraham Lincoln was in office. The  government never did that to Blacks. Our Government stole the Native Americans land. That was not the case with Blacks. As far as the Jees are concerned, the German Government systematically murdered thousand of Jews. Any other race they deemed inferior. One cannot compare the treatment of Native Americans directly by our Government to what happened with Blacks. It is apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree with you on the atrocities to Native Americans.  I totally disagree on the atrocities to blacks.  Blacks couldn't own land. They were owned property themselves.  They could be killed, whipped, starved and raped with inpunity.  Families were forcably seperated on the auction block. They were lynched for looking at a white woman.  They were used, without their consent in horrible medical experiments.  And it was all legal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree they were treated badly and the whole incident is an atrocity. However it was not directed by the U.S. government. The Governent that did, the confederate stars of America no longer exists. Slavery was more or less individual in nature. The money paid to purchase slaves was paid by individuals to other individuals in some cases to foreign Governments. Laws unfortunately did not go far enough to protect them. However the playing field has been rectified and the opportunities afforded to Whites are also afforded to Blacks. Some specific laws favor Blacks. The idea of reparations on top of what has been done is quite frankly ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
Click to expand...


Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blacks refuse police enforcement.
> They have schools which do not prepare them for college but heaven forbid they should enforce standards.
> They need the bar and $500.00 sneakers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you know full well you’re full of it.
Click to expand...


Just like you dude 

Complex problems usually don't have simple answers and things like education falls under complex.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blacks refuse police enforcement.
> They have schools which do not prepare them for college but heaven forbid they should enforce standards.
> They need the bar and $500.00 sneakers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
Click to expand...

We know how upwardly mobile the DC area is.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blacks refuse police enforcement.
> They have schools which do not prepare them for college but heaven forbid they should enforce standards.
> They need the bar and $500.00 sneakers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you know full well you’re full of it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just like you dude
Click to expand...

Roosevelt, Uniondale and Hempstead
And the few successful Blacks want nothing to do with the $500.90 sneaker wearers.


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blacks refuse police enforcement.
> They have schools which do not prepare them for college but heaven forbid they should enforce standards.
> They need the bar and $500.00 sneakers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We know how upwardly mobile the DC area is.
Click to expand...


We're going to get off topic if we keep on down this path.  What does it have to do with reparations?


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> 
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you know full well you’re full of it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just like you dude
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Roosevelt, Uniondale and Hempstead
> And the few successful Blacks want nothing to do with the $500.90 sneaker wearers.
Click to expand...


In otherwords...blacks are  not a monolithic culture.  About time folks started to figure that out.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> 
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Native Americans DO get reparations.
> 
> 
> the making of amends for wrong or injury done: reparation for an injustice.
> Usually *reparations.* compensation in money, material, labor, etc., payable by a defeated country to another country or to an individual for loss suffered during or as a result of war.
> restoration to good condition.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  They do not.  We are talking about reparations in the meaning of #1.
Click to expand...


They got reparations Coyote. Not saying it has been appropriate or that reparations would actually right the wrongs committed against them but they are wards of the government, they do not have to pay taxes, they are considered separate  nations as it pertains to reservations while getting American government money, there have been specific government legislation for Native American economic development only, just to name a few things.

It is ridiculous for some here to pretend that blacks just simply showed up here because African governments made agreements with whites to bring black slaves here. We were removed from our homes. Native Americans owned slaves. And you can use the same argument about Native Americans helping whites kill thier own as you can with that sorry excuse of Africans selling each other. 
*Native American Scouts*

*Native Americans had been utilized as Scouts as far back as white men had been settling the American continent. After the Civil War, Indians from more than a dozen tribes were enlisted to assist the Army during the Indian Campaigns of the Great Plains and Southwest regions. By 1866, the Army had been engaged in the Indian Wars for twenty years. The borderlands, however, posed particular challenges. With limited manpower, the Army, needed help because of the sheer size and difficulty of the land area involved. Congress, therefore, authorized the Army to form a corps of up to 1,000 Indian Scouts for reconnaissance and combat duty on August 1, 1866. In 1871, as Commander of the Arizona Territory, General George Crook was charged with subduing the last of the warring tribes and finally bringing order to the frontier. Facing desolate, unmapped terrain, brutal conditions, and a desperate enemy, Crook recruited White Mountain and San Carlos Apaches to chase down the elusive Chiricahua Apaches, led by Cochise. *

Native American Scouts


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blacks refuse police enforcement.
> They have schools which do not prepare them for college but heaven forbid they should enforce standards.
> They need the bar and $500.00 sneakers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We know how upwardly mobile the DC area is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We're going to get off topic if we keep on down this path.  What does it have to do with reparations?
Click to expand...

I’m right on target.
Blacks are given every opportunity and blow every one.


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> The atrocities to Native Americans were a direct result of Government activity and Government policies. Our Government specifically directed the army to slaughter Native Americans. The largest mass shooting in history happened to Native Americans and was directed by the U.S. Government while Abraham Lincoln was in office. The  government never did that to Blacks. Our Government stole the Native Americans land. That was not the case with Blacks. As far as the Jees are concerned, the German Government systematically murdered thousand of Jews. Any other race they deemed inferior. One cannot compare the treatment of Native Americans directly by our Government to what happened with Blacks. It is apples and oranges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you on the atrocities to Native Americans.  I totally disagree on the atrocities to blacks.  Blacks couldn't own land. They were owned property themselves.  They could be killed, whipped, starved and raped with inpunity.  Families were forcably seperated on the auction block. They were lynched for looking at a white woman.  They were used, without their consent in horrible medical experiments.  And it was all legal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree they were treated badly and the whole incident is an atrocity. However it was not directed by the U.S. government. The Governent that did, the confederate stars of America no longer exists. Slavery was more or less individual in nature. The money paid to purchase slaves was paid by individuals to other individuals in some cases to foreign Governments. Laws unfortunately did not go far enough to protect them. However the playing field has been rectified and the opportunities afforded to Whites are also afforded to Blacks. Some specific laws favor Blacks. The idea of reparations on top of what has been done is quite frankly ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
Click to expand...

It isn’t debatable. The army 


Coyote said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> The atrocities to Native Americans were a direct result of Government activity and Government policies. Our Government specifically directed the army to slaughter Native Americans. The largest mass shooting in history happened to Native Americans and was directed by the U.S. Government while Abraham Lincoln was in office. The  government never did that to Blacks. Our Government stole the Native Americans land. That was not the case with Blacks. As far as the Jees are concerned, the German Government systematically murdered thousand of Jews. Any other race they deemed inferior. One cannot compare the treatment of Native Americans directly by our Government to what happened with Blacks. It is apples and oranges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you on the atrocities to Native Americans.  I totally disagree on the atrocities to blacks.  Blacks couldn't own land. They were owned property themselves.  They could be killed, whipped, starved and raped with inpunity.  Families were forcably seperated on the auction block. They were lynched for looking at a white woman.  They were used, without their consent in horrible medical experiments.  And it was all legal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree they were treated badly and the whole incident is an atrocity. However it was not directed by the U.S. government. The Governent that did, the confederate stars of America no longer exists. Slavery was more or less individual in nature. The money paid to purchase slaves was paid by individuals to other individuals in some cases to foreign Governments. Laws unfortunately did not go far enough to protect them. However the playing field has been rectified and the opportunities afforded to Whites are also afforded to Blacks. Some specific laws favor Blacks. The idea of reparations on top of what has been done is quite frankly ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
Click to expand...

the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> 
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We know how upwardly mobile the DC area is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We're going to get off topic if we keep on down this path.  What does it have to do with reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I’m right on target.
> Blacks are given every opportunity and blow every one.
Click to expand...


So they ARE a monolithic group?  Plenty of successful black people out there.


----------



## Indeependent

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> 
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We know how upwardly mobile the DC area is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We're going to get off topic if we keep on down this path.  What does it have to do with reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I’m right on target.
> Blacks are given every opportunity and blow every one.
Click to expand...

My tax dollars are reparations.


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you on the atrocities to Native Americans.  I totally disagree on the atrocities to blacks.  Blacks couldn't own land. They were owned property themselves.  They could be killed, whipped, starved and raped with inpunity.  Families were forcably seperated on the auction block. They were lynched for looking at a white woman.  They were used, without their consent in horrible medical experiments.  And it was all legal.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree they were treated badly and the whole incident is an atrocity. However it was not directed by the U.S. government. The Governent that did, the confederate stars of America no longer exists. Slavery was more or less individual in nature. The money paid to purchase slaves was paid by individuals to other individuals in some cases to foreign Governments. Laws unfortunately did not go far enough to protect them. However the playing field has been rectified and the opportunities afforded to Whites are also afforded to Blacks. Some specific laws favor Blacks. The idea of reparations on top of what has been done is quite frankly ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It isn’t debatable. The army
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you on the atrocities to Native Americans.  I totally disagree on the atrocities to blacks.  Blacks couldn't own land. They were owned property themselves.  They could be killed, whipped, starved and raped with inpunity.  Families were forcably seperated on the auction block. They were lynched for looking at a white woman.  They were used, without their consent in horrible medical experiments.  And it was all legal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree they were treated badly and the whole incident is an atrocity. However it was not directed by the U.S. government. The Governent that did, the confederate stars of America no longer exists. Slavery was more or less individual in nature. The money paid to purchase slaves was paid by individuals to other individuals in some cases to foreign Governments. Laws unfortunately did not go far enough to protect them. However the playing field has been rectified and the opportunities afforded to Whites are also afforded to Blacks. Some specific laws favor Blacks. The idea of reparations on top of what has been done is quite frankly ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.
Click to expand...


They are equally detestable - slavery and the subsequent daily degradations of racist law, is just another death.  Many slaves were killed and died.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Native Americans DO get reparations.
> 
> 
> the making of amends for wrong or injury done: reparation for an injustice.
> Usually *reparations.* compensation in money, material, labor, etc., payable by a defeated country to another country or to an individual for loss suffered during or as a result of war.
> restoration to good condition.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  They do not.  We are talking about reparations in the meaning of #1.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They got reparations Coyote. Not saying it has been appropriate or that reparations would actually right the wrongs committed against them but they are wards of the government, they do not have to pay taxes, they are considered separate  nations as it pertains to reservations while getting American government money, there have been specific government legislation for Native American economic development only, just to name a few things.
> 
> It is ridiculous for some here to pretend that blacks just simply showed up here because African governments made agreements with whites to bring black slaves here. We were removed from our homes. Native Americans owned slaves. And you can use the same argument about Native Americans helping whites kill thier own as you can with that sorry excuse of Africans selling each other.
> *Native American Scouts*
> 
> *Native Americans had been utilized as Scouts as far back as white men had been settling the American continent. After the Civil War, Indians from more than a dozen tribes were enlisted to assist the Army during the Indian Campaigns of the Great Plains and Southwest regions. By 1866, the Army had been engaged in the Indian Wars for twenty years. The borderlands, however, posed particular challenges. With limited manpower, the Army, needed help because of the sheer size and difficulty of the land area involved. Congress, therefore, authorized the Army to form a corps of up to 1,000 Indian Scouts for reconnaissance and combat duty on August 1, 1866. In 1871, as Commander of the Arizona Territory, General George Crook was charged with subduing the last of the warring tribes and finally bringing order to the frontier. Facing desolate, unmapped terrain, brutal conditions, and a desperate enemy, Crook recruited White Mountain and San Carlos Apaches to chase down the elusive Chiricahua Apaches, led by Cochise. *
> 
> Native American Scouts
Click to expand...

Now if only those were afforded to all tribes.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We know how upwardly mobile the DC area is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We're going to get off topic if we keep on down this path.  What does it have to do with reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I’m right on target.
> Blacks are given every opportunity and blow every one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So they ARE a monolithic group?  Plenty of successful black people out there.
Click to expand...

Very small percentage or we wouldn’t have IM2 complaining.


----------



## there4eyeM

How much was a life worth in 1865? Take that, multiply by 600,000, then adjust for inflation and add compound interest. Then, deduct that from any figure for any hypothetical reparations for slavery.


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree they were treated badly and the whole incident is an atrocity. However it was not directed by the U.S. government. The Governent that did, the confederate stars of America no longer exists. Slavery was more or less individual in nature. The money paid to purchase slaves was paid by individuals to other individuals in some cases to foreign Governments. Laws unfortunately did not go far enough to protect them. However the playing field has been rectified and the opportunities afforded to Whites are also afforded to Blacks. Some specific laws favor Blacks. The idea of reparations on top of what has been done is quite frankly ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It isn’t debatable. The army
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree they were treated badly and the whole incident is an atrocity. However it was not directed by the U.S. government. The Governent that did, the confederate stars of America no longer exists. Slavery was more or less individual in nature. The money paid to purchase slaves was paid by individuals to other individuals in some cases to foreign Governments. Laws unfortunately did not go far enough to protect them. However the playing field has been rectified and the opportunities afforded to Whites are also afforded to Blacks. Some specific laws favor Blacks. The idea of reparations on top of what has been done is quite frankly ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are equally detestable - slavery and the subsequent daily degradations of racist law, is just another death.  Many slaves were killed and died.
Click to expand...

Slaves were not killed as a directive of the Government. There in lies the difference.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you know full well you’re full of it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just like you dude
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Roosevelt, Uniondale and Hempstead
> And the few successful Blacks want nothing to do with the $500.90 sneaker wearers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In otherwords...blacks are  not a monolithic culture.  About time folks started to figure that out.
Click to expand...


I am black, grew up in a black neighborhood and worked in them. Independent really needs to be quiet like he's an expert on blacks because he's seen 3 black neighborhoods. Most of those so called successful blacks this fool talks about are from the same neighborhoods he claims they want nothing to do with.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> 
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It isn’t debatable. The army
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are equally detestable - slavery and the subsequent daily degradations of racist law, is just another death.  Many slaves were killed and died.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were not killed as a directive of the Government. There in lies the difference.
Click to expand...


If slavery was legalized by the government and that same government decreed that blacks had no rights and blacks were killed as a result, the government did exactly that. I'm not even going to mention the government created slave patrols.


----------



## OldLady

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Love those canards don't you?
> 
> 
> 
> I work in 3 Black neighborhoods.
> Where does your hands on knowledge come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We know how upwardly mobile the DC area is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We're going to get off topic if we keep on down this path.  What does it have to do with reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I’m right on target.
> Blacks are given every opportunity and blow every one.
Click to expand...

I'm not seeing that.  Wake up.

The story of American poverty, as told by one Alabama county | PBS NewsHour

This is an eye opening video.   The poverty of black communities all over this country are still a problem.  The video wouldn't copy, but I beg you to watch it.


----------



## karpenter

Indeependent said:


> The Native Americans were allowed to open their well run casinos and many have made a fortune.


Not Everyone Can Live Off The Casinos
And Sell Crafts At The Cultural Center
The Best Thing For One's Future
Is To Leave The Reservation


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It isn’t debatable. The army
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are equally detestable - slavery and the subsequent daily degradations of racist law, is just another death.  Many slaves were killed and died.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were not killed as a directive of the Government. There in lies the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If slavery was legalized by the government and that same government decreed that blacks had no rights and blacks were killed as a result, the government did exactly that. I'm not even going to mention the government created slave patrols.
Click to expand...

Keep stretching. I’d continue but it’s Sunday and the wife is intent on doing something.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t debatable. The army
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are equally detestable - slavery and the subsequent daily degradations of racist law, is just another death.  Many slaves were killed and died.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were not killed as a directive of the Government. There in lies the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If slavery was legalized by the government and that same government decreed that blacks had no rights and blacks were killed as a result, the government did exactly that. I'm not even going to mention the government created slave patrols.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Keep stretching. I’d continue but it’s Sunday and the wife is intent on doing something.
Click to expand...


Nobody is stretching. You are just dumb.


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> My statement stands the only race worthy of considerations is the Native Americans. Blacks have equal footing today because of policies put forth, they have financial opportunities specifically for them as well as employment opportunities. That is reparations enough.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Totally incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree with that.  If people must be deemed "worthy" of reparations, then that cast's a whole different (and not very palatable) light on it. If Native Americans should receive reparations today, then so should blacks and so should women come to think of it.
> 
> And no, I disagree with your assertion that Native Americans got reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Native Americans DO get reparations.
> 
> 
> the making of amends for wrong or injury done: reparation for an injustice.
> Usually *reparations.* compensation in money, material, labor, etc., payable by a defeated country to another country or to an individual for loss suffered during or as a result of war.
> restoration to good condition.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  They do not.  We are talking about reparations in the meaning of #1.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They got reparations Coyote. Not saying it has been appropriate or that reparations would actually right the wrongs committed against them but they are wards of the government, they do not have to pay taxes, they are considered separate  nations as it pertains to reservations while getting American government money, there have been specific government legislation for Native American economic development only, just to name a few things.
> 
> It is ridiculous for some here to pretend that blacks just simply showed up here because African governments made agreements with whites to bring black slaves here. We were removed from our homes. Native Americans owned slaves. And you can use the same argument about Native Americans helping whites kill thier own as you can with that sorry excuse of Africans selling each other.
> *Native American Scouts*
> 
> *Native Americans had been utilized as Scouts as far back as white men had been settling the American continent. After the Civil War, Indians from more than a dozen tribes were enlisted to assist the Army during the Indian Campaigns of the Great Plains and Southwest regions. By 1866, the Army had been engaged in the Indian Wars for twenty years. The borderlands, however, posed particular challenges. With limited manpower, the Army, needed help because of the sheer size and difficulty of the land area involved. Congress, therefore, authorized the Army to form a corps of up to 1,000 Indian Scouts for reconnaissance and combat duty on August 1, 1866. In 1871, as Commander of the Arizona Territory, General George Crook was charged with subduing the last of the warring tribes and finally bringing order to the frontier. Facing desolate, unmapped terrain, brutal conditions, and a desperate enemy, Crook recruited White Mountain and San Carlos Apaches to chase down the elusive Chiricahua Apaches, led by Cochise. *
> 
> Native American Scouts
Click to expand...


Those aren't reparations - those are recognition of Native American reservations as separate "states" within the US and their rights as indiginous peoples.

They do pay taxes and they don't get any special rights or reparations.

Frequently Asked Questions - Native American Rights Fund

*Do Indians pay taxes?*
*All Indians are subject to federal income taxes.* As sovereign entities, tribal governments have the power to levy taxes on reservation lands. Some tribes do and some don’t. As a result, Indians and non-Indians may or may not pay sales taxes on goods and services purchased on the reservation depending on the tribe. However, whenever a member of an Indian tribe conducts business off the reservation, that person, like everyone else, pays both state and local taxes. State income taxes are not paid on reservation or trust lands.

*Do Native Americans receive any special rights or benefits from the U.S. government?*
Contrary to popular belief, Indians do not receive payments from the federal government simply because they have Indian blood. *Funds distributed to a person of Indian descent may represent mineral lease income on property that is held in trust by the United States or compensation for lands taken in connection with governmental projects. Some Indian tribes receive benefits from the federal government in fulfillment of treaty obligations or for the extraction of tribal natural resources* — a percentage of which may be distributed as per capita among the tribe’s membership. Read more about NARF’s work to hold governments accountable>>


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t debatable. The army
> the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are equally detestable - slavery and the subsequent daily degradations of racist law, is just another death.  Many slaves were killed and died.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were not killed as a directive of the Government. There in lies the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If slavery was legalized by the government and that same government decreed that blacks had no rights and blacks were killed as a result, the government did exactly that. I'm not even going to mention the government created slave patrols.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Keep stretching. I’d continue but it’s Sunday and the wife is intent on doing something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nobody is stretching. You are just dumb.
Click to expand...

Everything you say is a stretch. You have proven time and time again how totally racist and ignorant you are.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t debatable. The army
> the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are equally detestable - slavery and the subsequent daily degradations of racist law, is just another death.  Many slaves were killed and died.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were not killed as a directive of the Government. There in lies the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If slavery was legalized by the government and that same government decreed that blacks had no rights and blacks were killed as a result, the government did exactly that. I'm not even going to mention the government created slave patrols.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Keep stretching. I’d continue but it’s Sunday and the wife is intent on doing something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nobody is stretching. You are just dumb.
Click to expand...

Your racist ignorant rants are old and quite simply moronic. You lie, you adjust everything to support your weak racist narrative. But you are comical.


----------



## 9thIDdoc

Actually it is the slave owners who had their property confiscated without any form of reimbursement for their loss who deserve to be compensated.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Working in a black neighborhood in DC in a majority black workforce.
> 
> But more to the point, I can read and find resources.
> 
> 
> 
> So you know full well you’re full of it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just like you dude
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Roosevelt, Uniondale and Hempstead
> And the few successful Blacks want nothing to do with the $500.90 sneaker wearers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In otherwords...blacks are  not a monolithic culture.  About time folks started to figure that out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am black, grew up in a black neighborhood and worked in them. Independent really needs to be quiet like he's an expert on blacks because he's seen 3 black neighborhoods. Most of those so called successful blacks this fool talks about are from the same neighborhoods he claims they want nothing to do with.
Click to expand...

Because Black neighborhoods in the suburbs should be more successful and aren’t.
I also grew uo in Brooklyn and I am fully aware of the low standards expected in Black Communities.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you know full well you’re full of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like you dude
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Roosevelt, Uniondale and Hempstead
> And the few successful Blacks want nothing to do with the $500.90 sneaker wearers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In otherwords...blacks are  not a monolithic culture.  About time folks started to figure that out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am black, grew up in a black neighborhood and worked in them. Independent really needs to be quiet like he's an expert on blacks because he's seen 3 black neighborhoods. Most of those so called successful blacks this fool talks about are from the same neighborhoods he claims they want nothing to do with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Black neighborhoods in the suburbs should be more successful and aren’t.
> I also grew uo in Brooklyn and I am fully aware of the low standards expected in Black Communities.
Click to expand...


What you are is a white racist who imagines there are low standards expected in black communities.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just like you dude
> 
> 
> 
> Roosevelt, Uniondale and Hempstead
> And the few successful Blacks want nothing to do with the $500.90 sneaker wearers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In otherwords...blacks are  not a monolithic culture.  About time folks started to figure that out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am black, grew up in a black neighborhood and worked in them. Independent really needs to be quiet like he's an expert on blacks because he's seen 3 black neighborhoods. Most of those so called successful blacks this fool talks about are from the same neighborhoods he claims they want nothing to do with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Black neighborhoods in the suburbs should be more successful and aren’t.
> I also grew uo in Brooklyn and I am fully aware of the low standards expected in Black Communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What you are is a white racist who imagines there are low standards expected in black communities.
Click to expand...

Give me an example of a successful Black area in NYC.
Give me an example of a successful Black area in Nassau County.
I'll wait.


----------



## karpenter

Indeependent said:
			
		

> Give me an example of a successful Black area in NYC.
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in Nassau County.
> I'll wait.


The Answer Is.....
(Drum-Roll, Plz...)
"You're A Bigot"

Actually, It's My Understanding
That There Are Areas In Harlem That Are Being Restored
With-Out The Benefit Of White Gentrification

Although I've Never Personally Set Foot In NYC...


----------



## IM2

Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have is dependent upon government funding from every level. Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored. This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have is dependent upon government funding from every level. Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored. This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.


Funding from every level? Really? You bloviate and spew absolute innacurate information. My god you’re pathetic.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have is dependent upon government funding from every level. Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored. This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.


See post 452.


----------



## MizMolly

irosie91 said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade*
> By Dwayne Wong (Omowale)
> 
> There are many misconceptions about African history and nowhere is this more true than the topic of the slave trade. Very often I see comments by people who argue that Africans sold each other into slavery. There is some element of truth to this, but to speak of the slave trade solely as Africans selling each other t is a gross oversimplification of what was a complex historical event. *This also seems to be an attempt to shift the burden of the slave trade on the victims of that very trade. In How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Walter Rodney mentions how the white author of a book on the slave trade admitted that he was encouraged by other scholars to blame the slave trade solely on the Africans. This narrative helps to lessen European guilt by making Africans seem just as or even more guilty of being involved in the slave trade.* This piece is not an attempt to ignore the African role in the slave trade or to absolve those that were involved, but to to provide a more complete picture of the African involvement in slave trade.
> 
> *In the first place, the Portuguese initiated what eventually became the Trans-Atlantic slave trade mainly through slave raids along the coasts of Africa. The first of these raids came in 1444 and was led by Lançarote de Freitas. The problem with raiding for slaves was that it was extremely dangerous. For instance, the slave trader Nuno Tristão was killed during an ambush. Slave raiding proved to be an extremely dangerous way to obtain slaves, but buying slaves was much safer and took less effort on the part of the Europeans. Therefore, the first phase of the slave trade began not with a trade, but with a series of raids. This point is especially important because although the slave trade was on some levels based on a partnership between European buyers and African traders, the slave trade did not begin as such.*
> 
> *Moreover, the partnership between the traders and buyers was an uneasy one. The European slave traders often betrayed those who supplied them with slaves. A famous case of this was the African slave trader Daaga who was tricked and captured by slave traders. He was taken to Trinidad where he would eventually lead a mutiny. Another example is given by Anne Bailey in her book African Voices in the Atlantic Slave Trade. She mentions the story of Chief Ndorkutsu who had been providing captives to the European traders. Eventually some of the Ndorkutsu’s own relatives were tricked into boarding a slave ship and then taken as slaves to Cuba. In some cases, such as that of Madam Tinubu in Nigeria and Afonso of the Kongo Kingdom, those Africans that initially gave African captives to the Europeans came to resist the slave trade. Tinubu had a change of heart when she realized how inhumanely the slaves were treated. Afonso was almost assassinated by the Portuguese after he demanded an end to the slave trade in his kingdom.*
> 
> *Typically wars in West Africa were relatively short affairs that left a small number of causalities. The introduction of European weapons made these wars more drawn out and destructive affairs. Moreover, the only way Africans could acquire these firearms was through the trade of slaves. A king of Dahomey once requested that Europeans establish a firearms factory in his nation, but this request went ignored. Firearms became necessary for African nations to defend themselves both from African rivals as well as from European intrusion, but the only way to acquire these weapons was through the slave trade. This situation only benefited the competing European powers that were able to play Africans against each other.*
> 
> Finally, the slave trade left a negative legacy on both sides of the Atlantic. The Africans that were brought to the Americas were forced to labor as slaves, while enduring some of the most inhumane treatment imaginable. Those who remained, however, were left to mourn the lost of their friends and relatives that were taken away. *A handful of African traders and rulers may have gained some wealth from the slave trade, but overall it was a very negative event for Africa. There were African kingdoms, such as the Kongo Kingdom, that eventually fell due to the onslaught brought about by the slave trade.* We often think of the negative impact that the slave trade had on those who were captured, but the slave trade was also devastating for those who escaped being captured as well.
> 
> Some Africans did play a role in the slave trade and the trade could not have been as large as it was without cooperation from Africans. With that being said, *I think many people who have not properly studied the slave trade have a tendency to overstate how involved Africans were in a misguided attempt to shift the blame of the slave trade on Africans.*
> 
> —
> 
> _Dwayne is the author of several books on the history and experiences of African people, both on the continent and in the diaspora. His books are available through Amazon. You can also follow Dwayne on Facebook._
> 
> Did We Sell Each Other Into Slavery: Misconceptions About the African Involvement in the Slave Trade | HuffPost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh----ok ----the very BEST you could do   "some people overstate how involved Africans were....." ? ----<<< really impressive.    Your citation is silly---it dates the INCEPTION OF THE CONCEPT OF SLAVERY  to
> 1444  AD<<<<<<<<<  *ROFLMAO*
Click to expand...

And some people UNDERSTATE, such as IM2 lol


----------



## MizMolly

IM2 said:


> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have is dependent upon government funding from every level. Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored. This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.


What funding? And if whites have bad neighborhoods, I don't blame anyone but those whites who created it. I watch the news every night, the neighborhoods with the most crime are not white.


----------



## dave p

MizMolly said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have is dependent upon government funding from every level. Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored. This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> What funding? And if whites have bad neighborhoods, I don't blame anyone but those whites who created it. I watch the news every night, the neighborhoods with the most crime are not white.
Click to expand...

You’re right. If a neighborhood fails it’s because of those who live there. Plain and simple.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

IM2 said:


> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them



Tl/dr

If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it


----------



## karpenter

IM2 said:
			
		

> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.


Is That Right ??
I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
In Your Eyes...


> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture


Could You Be Specific
With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical


> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.


Oh, No
Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
We Know When We Are Layed Off


> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.


Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities

Maybe It's Just How You View Things
What Is The First Thing You See In This:

opportunityisnowhere


----------



## Andylusion

Coyote said:


> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
Click to expand...


So what?   You apparently missed the point.   Everyone everywhere thought slavery was fine.   Everyone.

Let's pretend for a moment that in 100 years, human being progress to the point that we accept that drugs we use today are destructive and dangerous.

From that perspective they would assume that our government is evil for allowing drug companies to sell all these drugs, and that we should pay reparations to all the people who have been harmed by the drugs we have today.

But here, now, today..... it's perfectly normal.   How can you condemn something that everyone today believes is normal and acceptable?   Can you really judge hundreds of millions of people, that are going based on their best information they have today?

Whether you like it or not, hundreds of years ago, no one thought there was anything wrong with slavery.  Even the slaves themselves didn't think it was wrong.   It was accepted throughout the world.

Now we have a Christian view of human beings, that all people are made by their creator equal.   But to say that people 200 years ago, should have the same views we have today, is ridiculous.

Why are you not demanding the Mayans in south America, pay reparations for the millions of children they slaughtered to their 'gods'?

How many other groups throughout the world, would you expect reparations from?

And by the way.... contrary to Holywood films, white people did not go throughout Africa randomly kidnapping people, and making slaves out of them.   White people purchased existing slaves, from black slave owners.   Should those nations in Africa be forced to pay reparations to American slaves?  After all, they codified it into law, just like everyone else.

Again.... slavery was a normal and accepted policy EVERYWHERE.  It wasn't just America.  Or just whites.  Or just anyone.   It was everyone.

Honestly, to me, this is the same as when I talk to Christians, and they expect pagans to follow Christian teaching, when they don't even know Christian teaching.   I think those Christians are just as crazy.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Roosevelt, Uniondale and Hempstead
> And the few successful Blacks want nothing to do with the $500.90 sneaker wearers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In otherwords...blacks are  not a monolithic culture.  About time folks started to figure that out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am black, grew up in a black neighborhood and worked in them. Independent really needs to be quiet like he's an expert on blacks because he's seen 3 black neighborhoods. Most of those so called successful blacks this fool talks about are from the same neighborhoods he claims they want nothing to do with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Black neighborhoods in the suburbs should be more successful and aren’t.
> I also grew uo in Brooklyn and I am fully aware of the low standards expected in Black Communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What you are is a white racist who imagines there are low standards expected in black communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in NYC.
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in Nassau County.
> I'll wait.
Click to expand...


Until you can discuss racist policy that creates the problems you will wait.

*City to Settle Discrimination Claim in Brooklyn Housing Plan*

An eight-year legal fight over racial discrimination by New York City in a proposed Brooklyn development is expected to be settled on Monday, after community groups and the administration of Mayor Bill de Blasio agreed on a new plan for affordable housing for the site.

The court battle, which began in 2009 and included consideration by the judge of racial segregation, concerned city-owned land in a triangular area at the border of Williamsburg, Bedford-Stuyvesant and Bushwick — rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods with large communities of Hasidic, Hispanic and black residents.

City to Settle Discrimination Claim in Brooklyn Housing Plan

*The lingering effects of NYC's racist city planning*

New York City was famously shaped by the powerful urban planner Robert Moses who, along with being a visionary, was demonstrably racist. Hopes&Fears takes a look at how his decisions, and those of his successors, still affect access and opportunity for minorities today. NYC is just one example of how systemic oppression affects the planning of cities across the country.

The fair housing laws passed in the last half-century have forced racists to devise whole new methods of discrimination, subtler but serving the same purpose: to keep people of color out of "white" spaces. The villains in these cases—landlords, brokers and neighbors—are often tough to identify, but, once exposed, are easy to loathe. It's harder to find fault with a sidewalk or a highway; when some feature of the city has seemingly always been there, you can lose sight of the fact that it was once new, conceived and constructed by people with their own inbuilt prejudices. But a city's landscape can exclude as effectively as any policy or person, in subtle but sinister ways.

The lingering effects of NYC's racist city planning


----------



## IM2

Andylusion said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what?   You apparently missed the point.   Everyone everywhere thought slavery was fine.   Everyone.
> 
> Let's pretend for a moment that in 100 years, human being progress to the point that we accept that drugs we use today are destructive and dangerous.
> 
> From that perspective they would assume that our government is evil for allowing drug companies to sell all these drugs, and that we should pay reparations to all the people who have been harmed by the drugs we have today.
> 
> But here, now, today..... it's perfectly normal.   How can you condemn something that everyone today believes is normal and acceptable?   Can you really judge hundreds of millions of people, that are going based on their best information they have today?
> 
> Whether you like it or not, hundreds of years ago, no one thought there was anything wrong with slavery.  Even the slaves themselves didn't think it was wrong.   It was accepted throughout the world.
> 
> Now we have a Christian view of human beings, that all people are made by their creator equal.   But to say that people 200 years ago, should have the same views we have today, is ridiculous.
> 
> Why are you not demanding the Mayans in south America, pay reparations for the millions of children they slaughtered to their 'gods'?
> 
> How many other groups throughout the world, would you expect reparations from?
> 
> And by the way.... contrary to Holywood films, white people did not go throughout Africa randomly kidnapping people, and making slaves out of them.   White people purchased existing slaves, from black slave owners.   Should those nations in Africa be forced to pay reparations to American slaves?  After all, they codified it into law, just like everyone else.
> 
> Again.... slavery was a normal and accepted policy EVERYWHERE.  It wasn't just America.  Or just whites.  Or just anyone.   It was everyone.
> 
> Honestly, to me, this is the same as when I talk to Christians, and they expect pagans to follow Christian teaching, when they don't even know Christian teaching.   I think those Christians are just as crazy.
Click to expand...


Incorrect, nor does it excuse what happened in America.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> In otherwords...blacks are  not a monolithic culture.  About time folks started to figure that out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am black, grew up in a black neighborhood and worked in them. Independent really needs to be quiet like he's an expert on blacks because he's seen 3 black neighborhoods. Most of those so called successful blacks this fool talks about are from the same neighborhoods he claims they want nothing to do with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Black neighborhoods in the suburbs should be more successful and aren’t.
> I also grew uo in Brooklyn and I am fully aware of the low standards expected in Black Communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What you are is a white racist who imagines there are low standards expected in black communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in NYC.
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in Nassau County.
> I'll wait.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Until you can discuss racist policy that creates the problems you will wait.
> 
> *City to Settle Discrimination Claim in Brooklyn Housing Plan*
> 
> An eight-year legal fight over racial discrimination by New York City in a proposed Brooklyn development is expected to be settled on Monday, after community groups and the administration of Mayor Bill de Blasio agreed on a new plan for affordable housing for the site.
> 
> The court battle, which began in 2009 and included consideration by the judge of racial segregation, concerned city-owned land in a triangular area at the border of Williamsburg, Bedford-Stuyvesant and Bushwick — rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods with large communities of Hasidic, Hispanic and black residents.
> 
> City to Settle Discrimination Claim in Brooklyn Housing Plan
> 
> *The lingering effects of NYC's racist city planning*
> 
> New York City was famously shaped by the powerful urban planner Robert Moses who, along with being a visionary, was demonstrably racist. Hopes&Fears takes a look at how his decisions, and those of his successors, still affect access and opportunity for minorities today. NYC is just one example of how systemic oppression affects the planning of cities across the country.
> 
> The fair housing laws passed in the last half-century have forced racists to devise whole new methods of discrimination, subtler but serving the same purpose: to keep people of color out of "white" spaces. The villains in these cases—landlords, brokers and neighbors—are often tough to identify, but, once exposed, are easy to loathe. It's harder to find fault with a sidewalk or a highway; when some feature of the city has seemingly always been there, you can lose sight of the fact that it was once new, conceived and constructed by people with their own inbuilt prejudices. But a city's landscape can exclude as effectively as any policy or person, in subtle but sinister ways.
> 
> The lingering effects of NYC's racist city planning
Click to expand...

So in other words you can’t answer a simple question. Just because you post a couple paragraphs that support your narrative from a single source doesn’t make it conclusive. DeBlasio is an idiot that rolls over for any group that his silly liberal guilt has harmed. Your little tired is hardly conclusive.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what?   You apparently missed the point.   Everyone everywhere thought slavery was fine.   Everyone.
> 
> Let's pretend for a moment that in 100 years, human being progress to the point that we accept that drugs we use today are destructive and dangerous.
> 
> From that perspective they would assume that our government is evil for allowing drug companies to sell all these drugs, and that we should pay reparations to all the people who have been harmed by the drugs we have today.
> 
> But here, now, today..... it's perfectly normal.   How can you condemn something that everyone today believes is normal and acceptable?   Can you really judge hundreds of millions of people, that are going based on their best information they have today?
> 
> Whether you like it or not, hundreds of years ago, no one thought there was anything wrong with slavery.  Even the slaves themselves didn't think it was wrong.   It was accepted throughout the world.
> 
> Now we have a Christian view of human beings, that all people are made by their creator equal.   But to say that people 200 years ago, should have the same views we have today, is ridiculous.
> 
> Why are you not demanding the Mayans in south America, pay reparations for the millions of children they slaughtered to their 'gods'?
> 
> How many other groups throughout the world, would you expect reparations from?
> 
> And by the way.... contrary to Holywood films, white people did not go throughout Africa randomly kidnapping people, and making slaves out of them.   White people purchased existing slaves, from black slave owners.   Should those nations in Africa be forced to pay reparations to American slaves?  After all, they codified it into law, just like everyone else.
> 
> Again.... slavery was a normal and accepted policy EVERYWHERE.  It wasn't just America.  Or just whites.  Or just anyone.   It was everyone.
> 
> Honestly, to me, this is the same as when I talk to Christians, and they expect pagans to follow Christian teaching, when they don't even know Christian teaching.   I think those Christians are just as crazy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Incorrect, nor does it excuse what happened in America.
Click to expand...

Your arguments get thinner every time you post. You’re a racist that can come to grips with reality and responsibility.


----------



## dave p

CrusaderFrank said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tl/dr
> 
> If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it
Click to expand...

He always quotes obscure articles authored by racist like him that want to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is Natiins in Africa have been selling slaves for thousands of years. But in this guys world he thinks the pyramids were built by union masons.


----------



## IM2

karpenter said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
Click to expand...


It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.

And that's not how I view things.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what?   You apparently missed the point.   Everyone everywhere thought slavery was fine.   Everyone.
> 
> Let's pretend for a moment that in 100 years, human being progress to the point that we accept that drugs we use today are destructive and dangerous.
> 
> From that perspective they would assume that our government is evil for allowing drug companies to sell all these drugs, and that we should pay reparations to all the people who have been harmed by the drugs we have today.
> 
> But here, now, today..... it's perfectly normal.   How can you condemn something that everyone today believes is normal and acceptable?   Can you really judge hundreds of millions of people, that are going based on their best information they have today?
> 
> Whether you like it or not, hundreds of years ago, no one thought there was anything wrong with slavery.  Even the slaves themselves didn't think it was wrong.   It was accepted throughout the world.
> 
> Now we have a Christian view of human beings, that all people are made by their creator equal.   But to say that people 200 years ago, should have the same views we have today, is ridiculous.
> 
> Why are you not demanding the Mayans in south America, pay reparations for the millions of children they slaughtered to their 'gods'?
> 
> How many other groups throughout the world, would you expect reparations from?
> 
> And by the way.... contrary to Holywood films, white people did not go throughout Africa randomly kidnapping people, and making slaves out of them.   White people purchased existing slaves, from black slave owners.   Should those nations in Africa be forced to pay reparations to American slaves?  After all, they codified it into law, just like everyone else.
> 
> Again.... slavery was a normal and accepted policy EVERYWHERE.  It wasn't just America.  Or just whites.  Or just anyone.   It was everyone.
> 
> Honestly, to me, this is the same as when I talk to Christians, and they expect pagans to follow Christian teaching, when they don't even know Christian teaching.   I think those Christians are just as crazy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Incorrect, nor does it excuse what happened in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your arguments get thinner every time you post. You’re a racist that can come to grips with reality and responsibility.
Click to expand...


YAWN! You know nothing about either term. You have no argument relative to his mater.


----------



## MaryL

Which slaves are we referring to? Plenty of people have been enslaved in the last 2000+ years. From the ancient Greeks to Modern  Africa. Thing about this is, how far out , how far back   can be anyone  to  held responsible?  It's a fun abstraction to argue about. I can demand a million shekels  from modern Egyptians  because I might be the descendant of a ancient  Jewish slave. Not because I am greedy or anything.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tl/dr
> 
> If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He always quotes obscure articles authored by racist like him that want to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is Natiins in Africa have been selling slaves for thousands of years. But in this guys world he thinks the pyramids were built by union masons.
Click to expand...


That might be where you think the pyramids were built but the argument you present has nothing to do with what happened in America. This is no obscure article and the fact is things just didn't happen as you white racists want to claim.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> In otherwords...blacks are  not a monolithic culture.  About time folks started to figure that out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am black, grew up in a black neighborhood and worked in them. Independent really needs to be quiet like he's an expert on blacks because he's seen 3 black neighborhoods. Most of those so called successful blacks this fool talks about are from the same neighborhoods he claims they want nothing to do with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Black neighborhoods in the suburbs should be more successful and aren’t.
> I also grew uo in Brooklyn and I am fully aware of the low standards expected in Black Communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What you are is a white racist who imagines there are low standards expected in black communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in NYC.
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in Nassau County.
> I'll wait.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Until you can discuss racist policy that creates the problems you will wait.
> 
> *City to Settle Discrimination Claim in Brooklyn Housing Plan*
> 
> An eight-year legal fight over racial discrimination by New York City in a proposed Brooklyn development is expected to be settled on Monday, after community groups and the administration of Mayor Bill de Blasio agreed on a new plan for affordable housing for the site.
> 
> The court battle, which began in 2009 and included consideration by the judge of racial segregation, concerned city-owned land in a triangular area at the border of Williamsburg, Bedford-Stuyvesant and Bushwick — rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods with large communities of Hasidic, Hispanic and black residents.
> 
> City to Settle Discrimination Claim in Brooklyn Housing Plan
> 
> *The lingering effects of NYC's racist city planning*
> 
> New York City was famously shaped by the powerful urban planner Robert Moses who, along with being a visionary, was demonstrably racist. Hopes&Fears takes a look at how his decisions, and those of his successors, still affect access and opportunity for minorities today. NYC is just one example of how systemic oppression affects the planning of cities across the country.
> 
> The fair housing laws passed in the last half-century have forced racists to devise whole new methods of discrimination, subtler but serving the same purpose: to keep people of color out of "white" spaces. The villains in these cases—landlords, brokers and neighbors—are often tough to identify, but, once exposed, are easy to loathe. It's harder to find fault with a sidewalk or a highway; when some feature of the city has seemingly always been there, you can lose sight of the fact that it was once new, conceived and constructed by people with their own inbuilt prejudices. But a city's landscape can exclude as effectively as any policy or person, in subtle but sinister ways.
> 
> The lingering effects of NYC's racist city planning
Click to expand...


Robert Moses was no more racist that LBJ or FDR.


----------



## MaryL

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tl/dr
> 
> If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He always quotes obscure articles authored by racist like him that want to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is Natiins in Africa have been selling slaves for thousands of years. But in this guys world he thinks the pyramids were built by union masons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That might be where you think the pyramids were built but the argument you present has nothing to do with what happened in America. This is no obscure article and the fact is things just didn't happen as you white racists want to claim.
Click to expand...

So, YOU define who's a victim according to your arbitrary constraints?  And you feel free to slander people in such a hateful manor, as well. Aren't you a piece of work.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tl/dr
> 
> If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He always quotes obscure articles authored by racist like him that want to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is Natiins in Africa have been selling slaves for thousands of years. But in this guys world he thinks the pyramids were built by union masons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That might be where you think the pyramids were built but the argument you present has nothing to do with what happened in America. This is no obscure article and the fact is things just didn't happen as you white racists want to claim.
Click to expand...

You have no cognitive skills. You said over and over that no black sold another black. You are categorically wrong. It’s been done for thousands of years. That was an example but your little brain can’t grasp it. You call me a white racist. You are a black racist. Your post prove it. Mine only point out the false hood of your narrative. Stop being a victim and do something of importance.


----------



## IM2

CrusaderFrank said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am black, grew up in a black neighborhood and worked in them. Independent really needs to be quiet like he's an expert on blacks because he's seen 3 black neighborhoods. Most of those so called successful blacks this fool talks about are from the same neighborhoods he claims they want nothing to do with.
> 
> 
> 
> Because Black neighborhoods in the suburbs should be more successful and aren’t.
> I also grew uo in Brooklyn and I am fully aware of the low standards expected in Black Communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What you are is a white racist who imagines there are low standards expected in black communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in NYC.
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in Nassau County.
> I'll wait.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Until you can discuss racist policy that creates the problems you will wait.
> 
> *City to Settle Discrimination Claim in Brooklyn Housing Plan*
> 
> An eight-year legal fight over racial discrimination by New York City in a proposed Brooklyn development is expected to be settled on Monday, after community groups and the administration of Mayor Bill de Blasio agreed on a new plan for affordable housing for the site.
> 
> The court battle, which began in 2009 and included consideration by the judge of racial segregation, concerned city-owned land in a triangular area at the border of Williamsburg, Bedford-Stuyvesant and Bushwick — rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods with large communities of Hasidic, Hispanic and black residents.
> 
> City to Settle Discrimination Claim in Brooklyn Housing Plan
> 
> *The lingering effects of NYC's racist city planning*
> 
> New York City was famously shaped by the powerful urban planner Robert Moses who, along with being a visionary, was demonstrably racist. Hopes&Fears takes a look at how his decisions, and those of his successors, still affect access and opportunity for minorities today. NYC is just one example of how systemic oppression affects the planning of cities across the country.
> 
> The fair housing laws passed in the last half-century have forced racists to devise whole new methods of discrimination, subtler but serving the same purpose: to keep people of color out of "white" spaces. The villains in these cases—landlords, brokers and neighbors—are often tough to identify, but, once exposed, are easy to loathe. It's harder to find fault with a sidewalk or a highway; when some feature of the city has seemingly always been there, you can lose sight of the fact that it was once new, conceived and constructed by people with their own inbuilt prejudices. But a city's landscape can exclude as effectively as any policy or person, in subtle but sinister ways.
> 
> The lingering effects of NYC's racist city planning
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Robert Moses was no more racist that LBJ or FDR.
Click to expand...


Well it doesn't matter what you think about Robert Moses his works speak for him.


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> 
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It isn’t debatable. The army
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The laws concerning slavery came from the government - the federal government and state governments prior to the confederacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are equally detestable - slavery and the subsequent daily degradations of racist law, is just another death.  Many slaves were killed and died.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were not killed as a directive of the Government. There in lies the difference.
Click to expand...

Was there a government directive to kill all Indians?


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Racist prick. You are a miserable excuse for a human . It is you who won’t admit what the real issues are. You think you are superior. You are the most ignorant human I have ever come across. You lie about who you are, what you’ve done and what each race is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the racist. I don't think I am superior to anyone. But your little tantrum here shows your insecurity. I know the real issues and I know whites like you have a problem facing them. I say this because I know far more whites who don't have your problem.
Click to expand...

I have no problem. My life is great, good family and nice weather. My black friends don’t share your victimhiod. They are productive secure and teach their kids values. I have no idea what your deal is other than being an angry racist.


----------



## dave p

Coyote said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It isn’t debatable. The army
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And have thusly been changed.* However no law ever existed and no directive was ever gussied or given to engage in genocide against Blacks as it Was to every tribe of Native Americans. Again I say apples and oranges.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are equally detestable - slavery and the subsequent daily degradations of racist law, is just another death.  Many slaves were killed and died.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were not killed as a directive of the Government. There in lies the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Was there a government directive to kill all Indians?
Click to expand...

The Indian wars which was directed by Andrew Jackson.


----------



## MaryL

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Racist prick. You are a miserable excuse for a human . It is you who won’t admit what the real issues are. You think you are superior. You are the most ignorant human I have ever come across. You lie about who you are, what you’ve done and what each race is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the racist. I don't think I am superior to anyone. But your little tantrum here shows your insecurity. I know the real issues and I know whites like you have a problem facing them. I say this because I know far more whites who don't have your problem.
Click to expand...

Kiddo, lay off the unprovable pejorative nouns, please?  The "r" word. 'Cause, I can call you a tax evader or Brony. Unprovable slanders, and it just makes you sound like a small minded control freak.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> In otherwords...blacks are  not a monolithic culture.  About time folks started to figure that out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am black, grew up in a black neighborhood and worked in them. Independent really needs to be quiet like he's an expert on blacks because he's seen 3 black neighborhoods. Most of those so called successful blacks this fool talks about are from the same neighborhoods he claims they want nothing to do with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Black neighborhoods in the suburbs should be more successful and aren’t.
> I also grew uo in Brooklyn and I am fully aware of the low standards expected in Black Communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What you are is a white racist who imagines there are low standards expected in black communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in NYC.
> Give me an example of a successful Black area in Nassau County.
> I'll wait.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Until you can discuss racist policy that creates the problems you will wait.
> 
> *City to Settle Discrimination Claim in Brooklyn Housing Plan*
> 
> An eight-year legal fight over racial discrimination by New York City in a proposed Brooklyn development is expected to be settled on Monday, after community groups and the administration of Mayor Bill de Blasio agreed on a new plan for affordable housing for the site.
> 
> The court battle, which began in 2009 and included consideration by the judge of racial segregation, concerned city-owned land in a triangular area at the border of Williamsburg, Bedford-Stuyvesant and Bushwick — rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods with large communities of Hasidic, Hispanic and black residents.
> 
> City to Settle Discrimination Claim in Brooklyn Housing Plan
> 
> *The lingering effects of NYC's racist city planning*
> 
> New York City was famously shaped by the powerful urban planner Robert Moses who, along with being a visionary, was demonstrably racist. Hopes&Fears takes a look at how his decisions, and those of his successors, still affect access and opportunity for minorities today. NYC is just one example of how systemic oppression affects the planning of cities across the country.
> 
> The fair housing laws passed in the last half-century have forced racists to devise whole new methods of discrimination, subtler but serving the same purpose: to keep people of color out of "white" spaces. The villains in these cases—landlords, brokers and neighbors—are often tough to identify, but, once exposed, are easy to loathe. It's harder to find fault with a sidewalk or a highway; when some feature of the city has seemingly always been there, you can lose sight of the fact that it was once new, conceived and constructed by people with their own inbuilt prejudices. But a city's landscape can exclude as effectively as any policy or person, in subtle but sinister ways.
> 
> The lingering effects of NYC's racist city planning
Click to expand...

Because that's the only Black neighborhood in Brooklyn.
Try harder.
You've got all of NYC and Nassau County at your disposal.
Your excuses are pathetic.

And by the way, there was a time when neighborhoods didn't let Jews in.
So we moved into slums and turned the slums into places where everybody, including Blacks, wanted to live.


----------



## dave p

MaryL said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tl/dr
> 
> If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He always quotes obscure articles authored by racist like him that want to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is Natiins in Africa have been selling slaves for thousands of years. But in this guys world he thinks the pyramids were built by union masons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That might be where you think the pyramids were built but the argument you present has nothing to do with what happened in America. This is no obscure article and the fact is things just didn't happen as you white racists want to claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, YOU define who's a victim according to your arbitrary constraints?  And you feel free to slander people in such a hateful manor, as well. Aren't you a piece of work.
Click to expand...

When they have a history of racist posts. Yes


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
Click to expand...


"And that's not how I view things"
We are well aware of how you view things.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tl/dr
> 
> If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He always quotes obscure articles authored by racist like him that want to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is Natiins in Africa have been selling slaves for thousands of years. But in this guys world he thinks the pyramids were built by union masons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That might be where you think the pyramids were built but the argument you present has nothing to do with what happened in America. This is no obscure article and the fact is things just didn't happen as you white racists want to claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have no cognitive skills. You said over and over that no black sold another black. You are categorically wrong. It’s been done for thousands of years. That was an example but your little brain can’t grasp it. You call me a white racist. You are a black racist. Your post prove it. Mine only point out the false hood of your narrative. Stop being a victim and do something of importance.
Click to expand...

 
I have said that the way you say things is not exactly how it was done. And it was not.  What's been dine for thousands of years is irrelevant to what happened in the US. People have murdered  for thousands of years also so does that excuse murder in this country? I've said nothing racist. Your entire argument is racist. You have not pointed out any falsehoods in my narrative. You can't. So you stop being a victim because I don't have to worry about the things I have done.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
Click to expand...


No you are not.


----------



## dave p

MaryL said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Racist prick. You are a miserable excuse for a human . It is you who won’t admit what the real issues are. You think you are superior. You are the most ignorant human I have ever come across. You lie about who you are, what you’ve done and what each race is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the racist. I don't think I am superior to anyone. But your little tantrum here shows your insecurity. I know the real issues and I know whites like you have a problem facing them. I say this because I know far more whites who don't have your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Kiddo, lay off the unprovable pejorative nouns, please?  The "r" word. 'Cause, I can call you a tax evader or Brony. Unprovable slanders, and it just makes you sound like a small minded control freak.
Click to expand...

First off I’m not your kiddo. Second his body of posts prove his racism. You have no ability from anything I’ve said to accuse me of tax evasion. Your post is disconnected at best .


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tl/dr
> 
> If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He always quotes obscure articles authored by racist like him that want to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is Natiins in Africa have been selling slaves for thousands of years. But in this guys world he thinks the pyramids were built by union masons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That might be where you think the pyramids were built but the argument you present has nothing to do with what happened in America. This is no obscure article and the fact is things just didn't happen as you white racists want to claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, YOU define who's a victim according to your arbitrary constraints?  And you feel free to slander people in such a hateful manor, as well. Aren't you a piece of work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When they have a history of racist posts. Yes
Click to expand...


But I don't have that history.


----------



## Indeependent

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tl/dr
> 
> If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He always quotes obscure articles authored by racist like him that want to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is Natiins in Africa have been selling slaves for thousands of years. But in this guys world he thinks the pyramids were built by union masons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That might be where you think the pyramids were built but the argument you present has nothing to do with what happened in America. This is no obscure article and the fact is things just didn't happen as you white racists want to claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have no cognitive skills. You said over and over that no black sold another black. You are categorically wrong. It’s been done for thousands of years. That was an example but your little brain can’t grasp it. You call me a white racist. You are a black racist. Your post prove it. Mine only point out the false hood of your narrative. Stop being a victim and do something of importance.
Click to expand...

It's happening today.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Racist prick. You are a miserable excuse for a human . It is you who won’t admit what the real issues are. You think you are superior. You are the most ignorant human I have ever come across. You lie about who you are, what you’ve done and what each race is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the racist. I don't think I am superior to anyone. But your little tantrum here shows your insecurity. I know the real issues and I know whites like you have a problem facing them. I say this because I know far more whites who don't have your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Kiddo, lay off the unprovable pejorative nouns, please?  The "r" word. 'Cause, I can call you a tax evader or Brony. Unprovable slanders, and it just makes you sound like a small minded control freak.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> First off I’m not your kiddo. Second his body of posts prove his racism. You have no ability from anything I’ve said to accuse me of tax evasion. Your post is disconnected at best .
Click to expand...


No there is no body of posts from me that prove any racism None.


----------



## karpenter

IM2 said:
			
		

> It's called federal, State and local funding..


You Mean The Taxes We All Pay For Roads & Schools ??

Or is this The Obama's
'You Didn't Build That' Stuff', Stuff...
Like Grocery Stores, Theaters, And My Home


----------



## dave p

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
Click to expand...

I view things from a reality perspective. We have all seen how you view things from a perspective of all blacks are victims, all whites are bad.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm amazed you haven't been banned with all the racist shot you post.
Click to expand...


Post an example.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tl/dr
> 
> If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it
> 
> 
> 
> He always quotes obscure articles authored by racist like him that want to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is Natiins in Africa have been selling slaves for thousands of years. But in this guys world he thinks the pyramids were built by union masons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That might be where you think the pyramids were built but the argument you present has nothing to do with what happened in America. This is no obscure article and the fact is things just didn't happen as you white racists want to claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, YOU define who's a victim according to your arbitrary constraints?  And you feel free to slander people in such a hateful manor, as well. Aren't you a piece of work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When they have a history of racist posts. Yes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But I don't have that history.
Click to expand...

For the days I have been reading, you do.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I view things from a reality perspective. We have all seen how you view things from a perspective of all blacks are victims, all whites are bad.
Click to expand...


You don't view anything from reality nor do I view anything from all blacks are victims and all whites are bad. W are in the fucking race and racism section talking about slavery. No matter how you try to paint the picture, whites were the bad guys as it pertains to slavery in America.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are the racist. I don't think I am superior to anyone. But your little tantrum here shows your insecurity. I know the real issues and I know whites like you have a problem facing them. I say this because I know far more whites who don't have your problem.
> 
> 
> 
> Kiddo, lay off the unprovable pejorative nouns, please?  The "r" word. 'Cause, I can call you a tax evader or Brony. Unprovable slanders, and it just makes you sound like a small minded control freak.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> First off I’m not your kiddo. Second his body of posts prove his racism. You have no ability from anything I’ve said to accuse me of tax evasion. Your post is disconnected at best .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No there is no body of posts from me that prove any racism None.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You mention his body...so you do autopsies now? And how does that work, a certain feeling, like spidy sense? Like gaydar, RACEDAR? I am puzzled, people  usually try to discourage racial profiling.. But YOU, you are above all that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you an idiot? Let me rephrase that. You are an idiot.  Read his posts. Better yet stay in the shallow end of the pool. These boards are to deep for you.
Click to expand...


There is nothing racist I have said.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I view things from a reality perspective. We have all seen how you view things from a perspective of all blacks are victims, all whites are bad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't view anything from reality nor do I view anything from all blacks are victims and all whites are bad. W are in the fucking race and racism section talking about slavery. No matter how you try to paint the picture, whites were the bad guys as it pertains to slavery in America.
Click to expand...

So were the blacks that sold them.  Every past you make talks about all whites being bad. Own up to it, and I’m a racist” the 12steps will be much easier then.


----------



## MaryL

dave p said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Racist prick. You are a miserable excuse for a human . It is you who won’t admit what the real issues are. You think you are superior. You are the most ignorant human I have ever come across. You lie about who you are, what you’ve done and what each race is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the racist. I don't think I am superior to anyone. But your little tantrum here shows your insecurity. I know the real issues and I know whites like you have a problem facing them. I say this because I know far more whites who don't have your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Kiddo, lay off the unprovable pejorative nouns, please?  The "r" word. 'Cause, I can call you a tax evader or Brony. Unprovable slanders, and it just makes you sound like a small minded control freak.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are are probable. Try reading.
Click to expand...

I don't care about your petty squabbles, I am not paying one thin penny as reparations for something I didn't do to people I never met, let alone an intellectual abstraction that borders on a greedy con job. So, carry on , kiddo.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you are not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm amazed you haven't been banned with all the racist shot you post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Post an example.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This whole Thread is an example of how you find the most obscure Links and then rant on about how all Whites know what's going on and we're happy as pigs in shit that it is going on.
> Do you ever read your own posts?
> If you do you, you need to see a psychiatrist.
Click to expand...


The links are not obscure and I've never said any of the crap you posted.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Cellblock2429 said:


> /-----/ No. I'm not looking for a straw. I'm looking for a simple answer to a simple question: If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.


Have you considered superior firepower?


----------



## Cellblock2429

NewsVine_Mariyam said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /-----/ No. I'm not looking for a straw. I'm looking for a simple answer to a simple question: If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.
> 
> 
> 
> Have you considered superior firepower?
Click to expand...

/——-/ Population of African warriors against a hand full of slave grabbers? Not talking about taking the ships. 1,000 Spears and arrows vs a few muskets. You do the math.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

karpenter said:


> '...would sell our own brothers and sisters?'...
> The Black Owners/Traders In America Sure Did


Is the Charles Manson family *your *brothers and sisters?


----------



## MaryL

karpenter said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm amazed you haven't been banned with all the racist shit you post.
> 
> 
> 
> Now, Now...
> We Need Someone To Squabble With
Click to expand...

Let me see here, wasn't this  thread about how we can monetize and exploit a racial issue? Or did I miss something?  Everything  prior was fluff. Nobody  is responsible for what happened in the past. These claims that non blacks  vaguely or by implication profited from slavery  250+ years ago  to the current day is irrational rhetoric. It comes off as a rather thin  intellectual game and speculative as well. Enough.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Indeependent said:


> I know Jews with a zero IQ who are literally billionaires and Jews who are geniuses and are poor.


This is true of every group.


----------



## NewsVine_Mariyam

Coyote said:


> How Black Slaves Were Routinely Sold As ‘Specimens’ To Ambitious White Doctors
> 
> 6 More Experiments on Slaves and Blacks You Just Might Not Know About


Thank you for posting these links, I was previously unaware of most of these instances.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I view things from a reality perspective. We have all seen how you view things from a perspective of all blacks are victims, all whites are bad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't view anything from reality nor do I view anything from all blacks are victims and all whites are bad. W are in the fucking race and racism section talking about slavery. No matter how you try to paint the picture, whites were the bad guys as it pertains to slavery in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So were the blacks that sold them.  Every past you make talks about all whites being bad. Own up to it, and I’m a racist” the 12steps will be much easier then.
Click to expand...


Sorry but things are not that simple. The blacks who were slaves in Africa were prisoners of wars between the tribes. Not because Africans were going around capturing people to enslave. I mean the story is far more complex than you want to even try understanding. Whites used criminals given them  help bridge the language and the prisoners were to be taught Christianity instead of being killed for their crimes. Some of them ended up as slaves. Some helped the whites by capturing slaves. Whites created confusion and conflict to increase  violence and tribal wars so they could get slaves.  So to just say what you guys do, to compare slavery in Africa to chattlel slavery here when African slaves were not property, nor were their descendants bound into slavery even while unborn is disingenuous at best.

Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery


----------



## IM2

Cellblock2429 said:


> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /-----/ No. I'm not looking for a straw. I'm looking for a simple answer to a simple question: If Africans didn't sell their neighbors into slavery then why didn't the African Nations do battle against the slave traders? They certainly had them out numbered 10,000 to one.
> 
> 
> 
> Have you considered superior firepower?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /——-/ Population of African warriors against a hand full of slave grabbers? Not talking about taking the ships. 1,000 Spears and arrows vs a few muskets. You do the math.
Click to expand...


You were shown that what you believe is wrong. Your question was answered.


----------



## Coyote

dave p said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t debatable. The army
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, as have laws regarding Native Americans.  Whether it is enslavement and all it's associated abuses or "genocide" (which is debatable that was an actual government policy) - it's all pretty horrible and neither is better or worse than the other.  This isn't a zero sum equation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the genicide isn’t debatable. And she se the specific targeting and killing of human beings by a Government is more detestable than the slavery issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are equally detestable - slavery and the subsequent daily degradations of racist law, is just another death.  Many slaves were killed and died.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were not killed as a directive of the Government. There in lies the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Was there a government directive to kill all Indians?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Indian wars which was directed by Andrew Jackson.
Click to expand...


Was the directive to kill all Indians though?


----------



## Coyote

*Thread is now reopened after another massive cleaning.  For the simple minded, here are the rules:*

*"Zone 2": Political Forum / Israel and Palestine Forum / Race Relations/Racism Forum / Religion & Ethics Forum / Environment Forum: Baiting and polarizing OP's (Opening Posts), and thread titles risk the thread either being moved or trashed. Keep it relevant, choose wisely. Each post must contain content relevant to the thread subject, in addition to any flame. No trolling. No hit and run flames. No hijacking or derailing threads.*

*This thread has a topic: Reparations.*

*The topic is not the members discussing it.  Tone down the accusations of "racist" towards each other and discuss the topic.  If you can't find another thread to participate in.*


----------



## Coyote

Andylusion said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NewsVine_Mariyam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Native Americans are the only race that should be given any money by the Government. They are the only race that the Government directly destroyed. Slaves were owned by individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> And who created and enforced the laws that made it legal for white individuals to enslave, abuse and violate the human rights of other human beings of African descent (but not white human beings), including the Fugitive Slave Act?  That's government created, sanctioned and enforced abuse.
> 
> One of the primary concerns after the slaves were freed was compensation to the slave owners for the "loss" of their "property".  Hopefully that should tell you something.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't the US government, that's for sure.   Slavery existed for thousands of years before the US government existed, or the colonies for that matter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US government codified it into law and was complicit in continuing the practice after much of the civilized world banned it.  Laws come from governments.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what?   You apparently missed the point.   Everyone everywhere thought slavery was fine.   Everyone.
> 
> Let's pretend for a moment that in 100 years, human being progress to the point that we accept that drugs we use today are destructive and dangerous.
> 
> From that perspective they would assume that our government is evil for allowing drug companies to sell all these drugs, and that we should pay reparations to all the people who have been harmed by the drugs we have today.
> 
> But here, now, today..... it's perfectly normal.   How can you condemn something that everyone today believes is normal and acceptable?   Can you really judge hundreds of millions of people, that are going based on their best information they have today?
> 
> Whether you like it or not, hundreds of years ago, no one thought there was anything wrong with slavery.  Even the slaves themselves didn't think it was wrong.   It was accepted throughout the world.
> 
> Now we have a Christian view of human beings, that all people are made by their creator equal.   But to say that people 200 years ago, should have the same views we have today, is ridiculous.
> 
> Why are you not demanding the Mayans in south America, pay reparations for the millions of children they slaughtered to their 'gods'?
> 
> How many other groups throughout the world, would you expect reparations from?
> 
> And by the way.... contrary to Holywood films, white people did not go throughout Africa randomly kidnapping people, and making slaves out of them.   White people purchased existing slaves, from black slave owners.   Should those nations in Africa be forced to pay reparations to American slaves?  After all, they codified it into law, just like everyone else.
> 
> Again.... slavery was a normal and accepted policy EVERYWHERE.  It wasn't just America.  Or just whites.  Or just anyone.   It was everyone.
> 
> Honestly, to me, this is the same as when I talk to Christians, and they expect pagans to follow Christian teaching, when they don't even know Christian teaching.   I think those Christians are just as crazy.
Click to expand...


Dude, you went off on a whole rant* half cocked*.

First off -* I oppose reparations. *

But that doesn't change the reality of history and attempting to white wash slavery is kind of disgusting...

American white people purchased slaves from other slave traders usually black or Arab, and then white people sold those slaves on the market to other white people.  When the transatlantic trade stopped - slavery continued in the US.  White people bred their own slaves.  Unlike other forms of slavery, where people were captured in war or conflict - we based slavery on skin color alone.  We continued with slavery *long after the civilized world abolished it *and abolished the Atlantic Slave Trade.


----------



## MaryL

I pay enough in taxes that end up god knows where, Highway taxes for instance. Highways aren't getting better.  I think ex slaves owe  non blacks for liberating them, perhaps 2 cents a pound.  Aw shucks, just call it even Steven and we can call the whole deal off. This was like 150 years ago,  so, well, get over it. I have. Since before  we were born, even. Why haven't you?


----------



## flacaltenn

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?



Makes a diff between estimating "market value" and "personal suffering".  You KNOW the big money in Civil suits isn't the "compensation" -- it's the DAMAGE award. So -- if that slave was your Great Great Grandmother/father -- and you can prove it -- maybe you get a HS scholarship for private school. BUT --- if you take this approach on WHOLE SOCIETY -- the number of qualifying persons who have a CERTIFIED geneological tie to a slave is probably less than 3% of the whole. So all interest in doing this would wane.

For ME -- I'd prefer to see MORE MODERN wrongs corrected. Like those affecting this generation. And have class action suits against boards of education that are FAILING urban black youth RIGHT NOW. And dooming them with this "lower expectations", minimal curriculum, fudge the statistics game playing that passes for urban poor education.

And folks band together and prioritize ENDING SLAVERY in the world tomorrow. THAT would be a legacy.


----------



## IM2

flacaltenn said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Makes a diff between estimating "market value" and "personal suffering".  You KNOW the big money in Civil suits isn't the "compensation" -- it's the DAMAGE award. So -- if that slave was your Great Great Grandmother/father -- and you can prove it -- maybe you get a HS scholarship for private school. BUT --- if you take this approach on WHOLE SOCIETY -- the number of qualifying persons who have a CERTIFIED geneological tie to a slave is probably less than 3% of the whole. So all interest in doing this would wane.
> 
> For ME -- I'd prefer to see MORE MODERN wrongs corrected. Like those affecting this generation. And have class action suits against boards of education that are FAILING urban black youth RIGHT NOW. And dooming them with this "lower expectations", minimal curriculum, fudge the statistics game playing that passes for urban poor education.
> 
> And folks band together and prioritize ENDING SLAVERY in the world tomorrow. THAT would be a legacy.
Click to expand...


Some of us either lack the intellect or refuse to understand how several trillion dollars of lost wages could have built black communities, provided for the creation of black owned industries and everything else which would grow just like white communities did and would be equal to what whites have today. That is what was lost just during slavery alone. This does affect blacks today regardless of who did or didn't descend from slaves.


----------



## flacaltenn

IM2 said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Makes a diff between estimating "market value" and "personal suffering".  You KNOW the big money in Civil suits isn't the "compensation" -- it's the DAMAGE award. So -- if that slave was your Great Great Grandmother/father -- and you can prove it -- maybe you get a HS scholarship for private school. BUT --- if you take this approach on WHOLE SOCIETY -- the number of qualifying persons who have a CERTIFIED geneological tie to a slave is probably less than 3% of the whole. So all interest in doing this would wane.
> 
> For ME -- I'd prefer to see MORE MODERN wrongs corrected. Like those affecting this generation. And have class action suits against boards of education that are FAILING urban black youth RIGHT NOW. And dooming them with this "lower expectations", minimal curriculum, fudge the statistics game playing that passes for urban poor education.
> 
> And folks band together and prioritize ENDING SLAVERY in the world tomorrow. THAT would be a legacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some of us either lack the intellect or refuse to understand how several trillion dollars of lost wages could have built black communities, provided for the creation of black owned industries and everything else which would grow just like white communities did and would be equal to what whites have today. That is what was lost just during slavery alone. This does affect blacks today regardless of who did or didn't descend from slaves.
Click to expand...


Do you support the Death Tax? No -- that's NOT a diversion. It's very much ON TOPIC and responsive to your post. Do Venus/Serena Williams or LL Cool J OWE 50% or more their estates to the govt OR should they be able to BUILD WEALTH for their heirs and institutions they support?  Maybe -- if you read the handbook on Capitalism, you KNOW HOW wealth is created and distributed and what policies actually INHIBIT the recouping of "lost wages" from blacks getting a rotten start. THEN we wouldn't be talking about such a LARGE claimant class.. 

I've pointed out to you MANY opportunities for you to SMASH those racist barriers and get wealthy. We had the "no black Greeting Cards is racist" discussion and SHOWED you the Black entrepreneurs who didn't WAIT for reparations and got REAL RICH FIXING a "perceived racist issue" by STARTING a Black Greeting Card business. I think if your group of "all whites are racists" would spend more time ORGANIZING and WORKING on solutions to industries and businesses that DONT design and market to blacks -- you'd be too wealthy and too busy to worry about reparations.


----------



## IM2

flacaltenn said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Makes a diff between estimating "market value" and "personal suffering".  You KNOW the big money in Civil suits isn't the "compensation" -- it's the DAMAGE award. So -- if that slave was your Great Great Grandmother/father -- and you can prove it -- maybe you get a HS scholarship for private school. BUT --- if you take this approach on WHOLE SOCIETY -- the number of qualifying persons who have a CERTIFIED geneological tie to a slave is probably less than 3% of the whole. So all interest in doing this would wane.
> 
> For ME -- I'd prefer to see MORE MODERN wrongs corrected. Like those affecting this generation. And have class action suits against boards of education that are FAILING urban black youth RIGHT NOW. And dooming them with this "lower expectations", minimal curriculum, fudge the statistics game playing that passes for urban poor education.
> 
> And folks band together and prioritize ENDING SLAVERY in the world tomorrow. THAT would be a legacy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some of us either lack the intellect or refuse to understand how several trillion dollars of lost wages could have built black communities, provided for the creation of black owned industries and everything else which would grow just like white communities did and would be equal to what whites have today. That is what was lost just during slavery alone. This does affect blacks today regardless of who did or didn't descend from slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you support the Death Tax? No -- that's NOT a diversion. It's very much ON TOPIC and responsive to your post. Do Venus/Serena Williams or LL Cool J OWE 50% or more their estates to the govt OR should they be able to BUILD WEALTH for their heirs and institutions they support?  Maybe -- if you read the handbook on Capitalism, you KNOW HOW wealth is created and distributed and what policies actually INHIBIT the recouping of "lost wages" from blacks getting a rotten start. THEN we wouldn't be talking about such a LARGE claimant class..
> 
> I've pointed out to you MANY opportunities for you to SMASH those racist barriers and get wealthy. We had the "no black Greeting Cards is racist" discussion and SHOWED you the Black entrepreneurs who didn't WAIT for reparations and got REAL RICH FIXING a "perceived racist issue" by STARTING a Black Greeting Card business. I think if your group of "all whites are racists" would spend more time ORGANIZING and WORKING on solutions to industries and businesses that DONT design and market to blacks -- you'd be too wealthy and too busy to worry about reparations.
Click to expand...


You need to understand that you can't show me shit. Because my group doesn't think all whites are racists.  I'm retired dipshit, don't need your advice on anything. I've already done what you have suggested. I already know the obstacles for black businesses and what needs to be done. I'm way ahead of you. So when I say what I do, it's because that's the way it is.


----------



## TheParser

I hope that NO (formal) reparation is granted.

It would only lead to one new  demand after another.


----------



## MizMolly

MaryL said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next time someone says, “But Africans sold themselves into slavery!”, send this article to them
> 
> EDITOR’S NOTE: *_The following except from pages 47-50 of Overturning the Culture of Violence, written by Penny Hess, Chairwoman of the African People’s Solidarity Committee and printed by Burning Spear Publications, debunks the cynical and anti-black argument that “Africans enslaved themselves.” This argument points to the presence of Africans who collaborated with the European slave masters and “sold” Africans to them in order to shift the responsibility for the slave trade off the shoulders of the European colonial slavemaster and onto the backs of the colonized and enslaved African._
> 
> _Today, as the voice of the enslaved African community asserts itself in the world and lifts up the demand for reparations, the blame-shifting “African collaborator” argument can be seen gaining traction in universities and bourgeois historical publications, not as an historical argument but as a political defense against the legitimacy of the reparations demand. As an organization of white people working under the leadership of the African People’s Socialist Party to organize white people in solidarity with the African struggle for liberation and reparations, we in the Uhuru Solidarity Movement find it timely to publish this excerpt here:_
> 
> *HUMAN BONDAGE: *Page 47-50, _Overturning the Culture of Violence _
> 
> The terrible impact that slavery has had on the continent of Africa cannot be calculated: the destruction of magnificent civilizations, the break-up of family and kinship circles, the massive depopulation, forced impoverishment, famine and starvation, the ravishing of an environment which had been so conducive to human civilization for millennia. From open, educated, prosperous and democratic societies, African people now lived in sheer terror, never knowing when their village or town would be raided for human loot by these white invaders.
> 
> Some North American people cynically place the blame for the enslavement of African people on the shoulders of African collaborators who participated in the kidnapping of their own people. *Impacted by the social destruction wreaked by invading Europeans, a tiny minority of the conquered people did find their own survival by participating in this treachery.*
> 
> The setting up of collaborators among the colonized population has been a successful tool of domination in every instance of European colonialism around the world. Africa is no exception. Europeans attack societies in Africa, Asia, or the Americas, destroying their traditional economies and long-standing social relationships. A unilateral colonial economy, which starves the people and creates the dependency on the colonial power, is militarily enforced.
> 
> *The European invader gets richer and richer through his bloodsucking relationship, and offers resources, guns and special status to a minority sector of the oppressed population. The selected “elite” or the colony can themselves become enslaved or carry out the will of white power.* If they take any stand independent of the colonizer as have, say, Panama’s Noriega or Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in today’s world, white power spares them none of its wrath.
> 
> This plan has worked well over the centuries. A few people in every colony have participated in the devious imperialist schemes of slavery, genocide, torture and exploitation of their own people, a collaboration which benefits no one more than the European or North American “mother” country.
> 
> The statement that “Africans enslaved their own people” separates out African people from other colonial subjects, all of whom have had their share of betrayal among their ranks. It is a statement of imperialism’s historic need to mobilize public opinion against African people.
> 
> Like the general white attitude toward the government-imposed drugs and dependent drug economy in today’s African communities, this statement lets the parasitic colonial economic system off the hook. It is an anti-black expression of unity with the oppression of African people, saying, “They did it to themselves.” Meanwhile all white people everywhere still benefit from the parasitic economic system which has as its foundation the enslavement and continued exploitation of African people.
> 
> *Most Africans resisted enslavement with all of their energy. Rebellions on slave ships were common. According to one source, “Many deaths on slave journeys across the Atlantic derived from violence, brawls, and above all, rebellions. There was probably at least one insurrection every eight to ten journeys.”*
> 
> *For example, Africans successfully rebelled in 1532 aboard the Portueguese slave ship the Misericordia. The 109 Africans on board “rose and murdered all the crew except for the pilot and two seaman. Those survivors escaped in a longboat. But the Misericordia was never heard of again.”*
> 
> *Slave ship owners often three Africans off the ships just to collect the insurance money. One famous case was that of a ship owned by William Gregson and George Case (both former mayors of Liverpool, England). The captain threw 133 Africans into the sea because if Africans were to die naturally, the owners would lose money, but if the African people were “thrown alive into the sea,” supposedly for the safety of the crew, “it would be the loss of the underwriters.”
> 
> So many African people died en route that it has been said that sharks followed slave ships all the way from Africa to the Americas.*
> 
> *Africans who survived the notoriously brutal middle passage, as the Atlantic crossing was known, reached the Americas barely alive. If they were too ill, they were left to die on the shore. They were sold like animals on public auction blocks, naked or in rags, weakened and emaciated, having survived the months below deck with disease and malnutrition, not to mention the emotional ravage sof such an experience. Many Africans committed suicide to avoid enslavement*, a practice otherwise unknown in African culture.
> 
> White buyers came to the market for slaves, “feeling the Africans’ limbs and bodies much as butchers handled calves. The slaves were often asked, as they had been told to do before leaving Africa, to show their tongues and teeth, or to stretch their arms.”
> 
> *In the Americas, Africans were “broken in” by submitting them to inhuman terror in an attempt to crush out any resistance.* The “breaking” process was psychological as well as physical, and included being forced to learn a version of a European language and to take a European name, something many Africans militantly resisted.
> 
> *Under the domination of their white slave masters, African people of all ages were branded, women on the breasts. Africans were whipped until they were deeply scarred, and their ears or ear lobes were cut off. People were slashed in the face, and their hands and feet were cut off to prevent them from running away. Men were castrated; women were raped. Women’s babies were cut out of their bellies for “punishment” and any man, woman or child could be forced to wear iron collars on their necks for life.*
> 
> Under such brutal conditions, normal human relationships between men and woman or parents and children were interrupted and nearly impossible. Mothers were forced to work the full nine months of pregnancy, often giving birth in the field. They were then forced to abandon their children, as they had to keep on working or nurse the children of the slave master.
> 
> Next time someone says, "But Africans sold themselves into slavery!", send this article to them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tl/dr
> 
> If you hate it here so much, leave. Republicans fought to set you free, make the most of it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He always quotes obscure articles authored by racist like him that want to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is Natiins in Africa have been selling slaves for thousands of years. But in this guys world he thinks the pyramids were built by union masons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That might be where you think the pyramids were built but the argument you present has nothing to do with what happened in America. This is no obscure article and the fact is things just didn't happen as you white racists want to claim.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, YOU define who's a victim according to your arbitrary constraints?  And you feel free to slander people in such a hateful manor, as well. Aren't you a piece of work.
Click to expand...

He decides that he is the only one who knows everything there is to know about race, about racism, about whites, about what whites do not know (which is everything)


----------



## MizMolly

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some whites are real funny about declaring what's successful when the success their communities had have
> *is dependent upon government funding from every level*.
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> 
> 
> 
> Whites are real good at understanding why their communities  have problems but when the same things happen in black communities then the problem turns to blacks/black culture
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> 
> 
> 
> and things like factory closings and economic downturns are ignored.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> 
> 
> 
> This along with the ability for whites to just "forget" makes these discussions difficult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I view things from a reality perspective. We have all seen how you view things from a perspective of all blacks are victims, all whites are bad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't view anything from reality nor do I view anything from all blacks are victims and all whites are bad. W are in the fucking race and racism section talking about slavery. No matter how you try to paint the picture, whites were the bad guys as it pertains to slavery in America.
Click to expand...

Yes they were, so were the blacks who sold them into slavery and the blacks who owned slaves


----------



## MizMolly

MaryL said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> 
> 
> Racist prick. You are a miserable excuse for a human . It is you who won’t admit what the real issues are. You think you are superior. You are the most ignorant human I have ever come across. You lie about who you are, what you’ve done and what each race is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the racist. I don't think I am superior to anyone. But your little tantrum here shows your insecurity. I know the real issues and I know whites like you have a problem facing them. I say this because I know far more whites who don't have your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Kiddo, lay off the unprovable pejorative nouns, please?  The "r" word. 'Cause, I can call you a tax evader or Brony. Unprovable slanders, and it just makes you sound like a small minded control freak.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are are probable. Try reading.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't care about your petty squabbles, I am not paying one thin penny as reparations for something I didn't do to people I never met, let alone an intellectual abstraction that borders on a greedy con job. So, carry on , kiddo.
Click to expand...

He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.


----------



## Coyote

MizMolly said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> Racist prick. You are a miserable excuse for a human . It is you who won’t admit what the real issues are. You think you are superior. You are the most ignorant human I have ever come across. You lie about who you are, what you’ve done and what each race is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the racist. I don't think I am superior to anyone. But your little tantrum here shows your insecurity. I know the real issues and I know whites like you have a problem facing them. I say this because I know far more whites who don't have your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Kiddo, lay off the unprovable pejorative nouns, please?  The "r" word. 'Cause, I can call you a tax evader or Brony. Unprovable slanders, and it just makes you sound like a small minded control freak.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are are probable. Try reading.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't care about your petty squabbles, I am not paying one thin penny as reparations for something I didn't do to people I never met, let alone an intellectual abstraction that borders on a greedy con job. So, carry on , kiddo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.
Click to expand...


“He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are the racist. I don't think I am superior to anyone. But your little tantrum here shows your insecurity. I know the real issues and I know whites like you have a problem facing them. I say this because I know far more whites who don't have your problem.
> 
> 
> 
> Kiddo, lay off the unprovable pejorative nouns, please?  The "r" word. 'Cause, I can call you a tax evader or Brony. Unprovable slanders, and it just makes you sound like a small minded control freak.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are are probable. Try reading.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't care about your petty squabbles, I am not paying one thin penny as reparations for something I didn't do to people I never met, let alone an intellectual abstraction that borders on a greedy con job. So, carry on , kiddo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
Click to expand...

Then why does he need to infer threats?


----------



## MizMolly

Coyote said:


> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are the racist. I don't think I am superior to anyone. But your little tantrum here shows your insecurity. I know the real issues and I know whites like you have a problem facing them. I say this because I know far more whites who don't have your problem.
> 
> 
> 
> Kiddo, lay off the unprovable pejorative nouns, please?  The "r" word. 'Cause, I can call you a tax evader or Brony. Unprovable slanders, and it just makes you sound like a small minded control freak.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are are probable. Try reading.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't care about your petty squabbles, I am not paying one thin penny as reparations for something I didn't do to people I never met, let alone an intellectual abstraction that borders on a greedy con job. So, carry on , kiddo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
Click to expand...

My post was on topic


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kiddo, lay off the unprovable pejorative nouns, please?  The "r" word. 'Cause, I can call you a tax evader or Brony. Unprovable slanders, and it just makes you sound like a small minded control freak.
> 
> 
> 
> They are are probable. Try reading.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't care about your petty squabbles, I am not paying one thin penny as reparations for something I didn't do to people I never met, let alone an intellectual abstraction that borders on a greedy con job. So, carry on , kiddo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
Click to expand...


"He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.

So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.


----------



## IM2

TheParser said:


> I hope that NO (formal) reparation is granted.
> 
> It would only lead to one new  demand after another.



Like all the demands whites keep making after being given free land at least twice and very other advantage for now 242 years?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are are probable. Try reading.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care about your petty squabbles, I am not paying one thin penny as reparations for something I didn't do to people I never met, let alone an intellectual abstraction that borders on a greedy con job. So, carry on , kiddo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
Click to expand...

Yawn...
How many decades do you need to get your act together?


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care about your petty squabbles, I am not paying one thin penny as reparations for something I didn't do to people I never met, let alone an intellectual abstraction that borders on a greedy con job. So, carry on , kiddo.
> 
> 
> 
> He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
Click to expand...


We are in year 53 after the passage of the civil rights act and whites still don't follow the laws. However if we compare these 53 years to the first 53 years of whites being here, we are way ahead as whites were still on the British teat getting free land as part of the headright program.

So how many more centuries will it take for whites to get their act together?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are in year 53 after the passage of the civil rights act and whites still don't follow the laws. However if we compare these 53 years to the first 53 years of whites being here, we are way ahead as whites were still on the British teat getting free land as part of the headright program.
> 
> So how many more centuries will it take for whites to get their act together?
Click to expand...

The Irish became cops, the Germans became fire fighters, the Italians hung out out with the Jews and started Blue and White collapsed businesses.

There are several Jewish ghettos in NYC where everyone converges for business.

I shopped for years on 9th Avenue near Penn Station...Hispanics working their butts off.

Any other excuses?


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are are probable. Try reading.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care about your petty squabbles, I am not paying one thin penny as reparations for something I didn't do to people I never met, let alone an intellectual abstraction that borders on a greedy con job. So, carry on , kiddo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
Click to expand...


God will destroy the US if reparations are not paid?  

Here's a question: Why hasn't god already destroyed the US?  The slaves were never paid the wages owed, and they are all long since dead.  Does the Bible say that god will destroy a nation that doesn't pay slaves after a certain amount of time has passed? 

"Because god commands it" is at least a fairly novel argument in favor of reparations.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care about your petty squabbles, I am not paying one thin penny as reparations for something I didn't do to people I never met, let alone an intellectual abstraction that borders on a greedy con job. So, carry on , kiddo.
> 
> 
> 
> He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
Click to expand...


Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> He makes what appears to be threats if whites refuse to pay reparations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
Click to expand...

The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
> 
> 
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
Click to expand...

What question is that?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What question is that?
Click to expand...

Enjoy your fantasy of why *you* can’t name one Black community that’s safe after dark.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> 
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What question is that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enjoy your fantasy of why *you* can’t name one Black community that’s safe after dark.
Click to expand...

I can name several but I dont understand what that has to do with the fact whites had 3 centuries of white male only affirmative action?


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> “He” is not the topic.  Reparations are.
> 
> 
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
Click to expand...

*And it is also off topic.*


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What question is that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enjoy your fantasy of why *you* can’t name one Black community that’s safe after dark.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can name several but I dont understand what that has to do with the fact whites had 3 centuries of white male only affirmative action?
Click to expand...

Name them.
Blacks have had 50 years.
Damn!
The Jews built a state of the art nation in 70 years while being attacked on all sides.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> 
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What question is that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enjoy your fantasy of why *you* can’t name one Black community that’s safe after dark.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can name several but I dont understand what that has to do with the fact whites had 3 centuries of white male only affirmative action?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Name them.
> Blacks have had 50 years.
> Damn!
> The Jews built a state of the art nation in 70 years while being attacked on all sides.
Click to expand...

Off topic
Whites have had 3 centuries of white only AA. Blacks have had 50 years of shared AA so that doesnt count. I guarantee you if we had Black only AA for even 50 years Blacks would be in control of this country.

Wrong again. Jews (white ones) had help from every european country and the US.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> 
> 
> What question is that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enjoy your fantasy of why *you* can’t name one Black community that’s safe after dark.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can name several but I dont understand what that has to do with the fact whites had 3 centuries of white male only affirmative action?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Name them.
> Blacks have had 50 years.
> Damn!
> The Jews built a state of the art nation in 70 years while being attacked on all sides.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off topic
> Whites have had 3 centuries of white only AA. Blacks have had 50 years of shared AA so that doesnt count. I guarantee you if we had Black only AA for even 50 years Blacks would be in control of this country.
> 
> Wrong again. Jews (white ones) had help from every european country and the US.
Click to expand...

Bullshit.
You’ve had Civil Rights for 50 years and you’re still demanding hand outs.
Name the cities.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> What question is that?
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy your fantasy of why *you* can’t name one Black community that’s safe after dark.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can name several but I dont understand what that has to do with the fact whites had 3 centuries of white male only affirmative action?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Name them.
> Blacks have had 50 years.
> Damn!
> The Jews built a state of the art nation in 70 years while being attacked on all sides.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off topic
> Whites have had 3 centuries of white only AA. Blacks have had 50 years of shared AA so that doesnt count. I guarantee you if we had Black only AA for even 50 years Blacks would be in control of this country.
> 
> Wrong again. Jews (white ones) had help from every european country and the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.
> You’ve had Civil Rights for 50 years and you’re still demanding hand outs.
> Name the cities.
Click to expand...

Bullshit
You've had white only AA for 3 centuries and youre still trying to get more free handouts.
I already told you the answer is no. I wont address any off topic points.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then why does he need to infer threats?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
Click to expand...

No it isn’t.
And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy your fantasy of why *you* can’t name one Black community that’s safe after dark.
> 
> 
> 
> I can name several but I dont understand what that has to do with the fact whites had 3 centuries of white male only affirmative action?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Name them.
> Blacks have had 50 years.
> Damn!
> The Jews built a state of the art nation in 70 years while being attacked on all sides.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off topic
> Whites have had 3 centuries of white only AA. Blacks have had 50 years of shared AA so that doesnt count. I guarantee you if we had Black only AA for even 50 years Blacks would be in control of this country.
> 
> Wrong again. Jews (white ones) had help from every european country and the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.
> You’ve had Civil Rights for 50 years and you’re still demanding hand outs.
> Name the cities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit
> You've had white only AA for 3 centuries and youre still trying to get more free handouts.
> I already told you the answer is no. I wont address any off topic points.
Click to expand...

Yous contributions to every Thread are the same.
Being angry contributes nothing to a discussion.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> 
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
Click to expand...

Yes its off topic moron.

Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?

Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors

Theres plenty of precedent.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can name several but I dont understand what that has to do with the fact whites had 3 centuries of white male only affirmative action?
> 
> 
> 
> Name them.
> Blacks have had 50 years.
> Damn!
> The Jews built a state of the art nation in 70 years while being attacked on all sides.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off topic
> Whites have had 3 centuries of white only AA. Blacks have had 50 years of shared AA so that doesnt count. I guarantee you if we had Black only AA for even 50 years Blacks would be in control of this country.
> 
> Wrong again. Jews (white ones) had help from every european country and the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.
> You’ve had Civil Rights for 50 years and you’re still demanding hand outs.
> Name the cities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit
> You've had white only AA for 3 centuries and youre still trying to get more free handouts.
> I already told you the answer is no. I wont address any off topic points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yous contributions to every Thread are the same.
> Being angry contributes nothing to a discussion.
Click to expand...

What makes you think I am angry and why cant you address the topic?  Are you claiming whites didnt have 3 centuries of white male only AA?


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "He" is not making threats. You don't get to make up everything in life. I'm saying that what was done is immoral and that there is a spiritual cost for immorality. The penalty for the refusal to pay slaves after their service what is owed is mentioned in the bible and the punishment for that was a destroyed nation. So I am saying that if America does not pay what we are owed, the master of humanity, or our creator, will level a punishment on this nation. God isn't concerned about who didn't do what today, he has punished generations for sins of prior generations many times. God does not have a statute of limitations for sin.
> 
> So all this blowhard talk about what you won't pay, what you don't believe should be pad or any of the excuses made here really don't concern me. "Vengeance is mine, saith the lord." I don't have to threaten anyone.
> 
> 
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
Click to expand...

*Yes it is.  Crime rates in cities is a typical diversion in threads in Race.  Knock it and stick to the topic.*


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
Click to expand...

Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.

*That’s* why they received payment.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
Click to expand...

In a matter of speaking...they got a nation.  But the precedent doesnt work.  It only went to suvivors not descendents.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> 
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
Click to expand...

So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name them.
> Blacks have had 50 years.
> Damn!
> The Jews built a state of the art nation in 70 years while being attacked on all sides.
> 
> 
> 
> Off topic
> Whites have had 3 centuries of white only AA. Blacks have had 50 years of shared AA so that doesnt count. I guarantee you if we had Black only AA for even 50 years Blacks would be in control of this country.
> 
> Wrong again. Jews (white ones) had help from every european country and the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit.
> You’ve had Civil Rights for 50 years and you’re still demanding hand outs.
> Name the cities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit
> You've had white only AA for 3 centuries and youre still trying to get more free handouts.
> I already told you the answer is no. I wont address any off topic points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yous contributions to every Thread are the same.
> Being angry contributes nothing to a discussion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think I am angry and why cant you address the topic?  Are you claiming whites didnt have 3 centuries of white male only AA?
Click to expand...

What Whites?
Be specific.
Irish?  Nope.
Germans?  Nope.
Italians...Nope.


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> 
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
Click to expand...


No.  It is not.  It had nothing to do with their educational level or contribution.  It was a direct reflection of the atrocity committed on them by the German government.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> 
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In a matter of speaking...they got a nation.  But the precedent doesnt work.  It only went to suvivors not descendents.
Click to expand...

In the absence of the survivors the descendants should get the proceeds. Thats just logical.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> 
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
Click to expand...

The slaves got sold by their families, fed and clothed by their masters for performing blue color work.

I guess Hispanics picking fruit should be paid $50.00/hour.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Off topic
> Whites have had 3 centuries of white only AA. Blacks have had 50 years of shared AA so that doesnt count. I guarantee you if we had Black only AA for even 50 years Blacks would be in control of this country.
> 
> Wrong again. Jews (white ones) had help from every european country and the US.
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
> You’ve had Civil Rights for 50 years and you’re still demanding hand outs.
> Name the cities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit
> You've had white only AA for 3 centuries and youre still trying to get more free handouts.
> I already told you the answer is no. I wont address any off topic points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yous contributions to every Thread are the same.
> Being angry contributes nothing to a discussion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think I am angry and why cant you address the topic?  Are you claiming whites didnt have 3 centuries of white male only AA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What Whites?
> Be specific.
> Irish?  Nope.
> Germans?  Nope.
> Italians...Nope.
Click to expand...

All whites. Specifically white males.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> 
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
Click to expand...

Their descendents are not getting anything...descendents should not.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The slaves got sold by their families, fed and clothed by their masters for performing blue color work.
> 
> I guess Hispanics picking fruit should be paid $50.00/hour.
Click to expand...

Youre deflecting agains instead of answering my question. 

What kind of idiot makes that comparison with Jewish survivors and the enslaved that never got their wages?


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> 
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  It is not.  It had nothing to do with their educational level or contribution.  It was a direct reflection of the atrocity committed on them by the German government.
Click to expand...

Incorrect.
My in-laws survived and many factors went into the calculations.
Not every survivor from a town received the same restitution.


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The slaves got sold by their families, fed and clothed by their masters for performing blue color work.
> 
> I guess Hispanics picking fruit should be paid $50.00/hour.
Click to expand...

Bullshit comparison.  You compate slavery to wage labor?


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Their descendents are not getting anything...descendents should not.
Click to expand...

Why should the descendants not get anything? It was owed to the survivors who were unable to pass it on to their descendants.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.
> You’ve had Civil Rights for 50 years and you’re still demanding hand outs.
> Name the cities.
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit
> You've had white only AA for 3 centuries and youre still trying to get more free handouts.
> I already told you the answer is no. I wont address any off topic points.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yous contributions to every Thread are the same.
> Being angry contributes nothing to a discussion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think I am angry and why cant you address the topic?  Are you claiming whites didnt have 3 centuries of white male only AA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What Whites?
> Be specific.
> Irish?  Nope.
> Germans?  Nope.
> Italians...Nope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All whites. Specifically white males.
Click to expand...

Why?
Many came to the US way after slavery was abolished.
Your post is pure racism.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The slaves got sold by their families, fed and clothed by their masters for performing blue color work.
> 
> I guess Hispanics picking fruit should be paid $50.00/hour.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit comparison.  You compate slavery to wage labor?
Click to expand...

Then conduct a seance and discuss the matter with their ancestors.


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> *And it is also off topic.*
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  It is not.  It had nothing to do with their educational level or contribution.  It was a direct reflection of the atrocity committed on them by the German government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Incorrect.
> My in-laws survived and many factors went into the calculations.
> Not every survivor from a town received the same restitution.
Click to expand...


So the less educated ones received less or was it based on what they had earned prior?  Either way though, even the least educated recieved something.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit
> You've had white only AA for 3 centuries and youre still trying to get more free handouts.
> I already told you the answer is no. I wont address any off topic points.
> 
> 
> 
> Yous contributions to every Thread are the same.
> Being angry contributes nothing to a discussion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think I am angry and why cant you address the topic?  Are you claiming whites didnt have 3 centuries of white male only AA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What Whites?
> Be specific.
> Irish?  Nope.
> Germans?  Nope.
> Italians...Nope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All whites. Specifically white males.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?
> Many came to the US way after slavery was abolished.
> Your post is pure racism.
Click to expand...

Because whites knew they needed a head start.
Doesnt matter when they came. They were still granted a position on the social and economic ladder that was higher than Blacks.
If you say so.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yawn...
> How many decades do you need to get your act together?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What question is that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enjoy your fantasy of why *you* can’t name one Black community that’s safe after dark.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can name several but I dont understand what that has to do with the fact whites had 3 centuries of white male only affirmative action?
Click to expand...

Damned!  I thought you were referring to Alcoholics Anonymous.  Silly me!  AA is pretty much color blind, you know.


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> 
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The slaves got sold by their families, fed and clothed by their masters for performing blue color work.
> 
> I guess Hispanics picking fruit should be paid $50.00/hour.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit comparison.  You compate slavery to wage labor?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then conduct a seance and discuss the matter with their ancestors.
Click to expand...

Why?  Comparing slavery to free labor is like comparing concentration camps to immigrsnt detainment centers.  False moral equivalency.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  It is not.  It had nothing to do with their educational level or contribution.  It was a direct reflection of the atrocity committed on them by the German government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Incorrect.
> My in-laws survived and many factors went into the calculations.
> Not every survivor from a town received the same restitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the less educated ones received less or was it based on what they had earned prior?  Either way though, even the least educated recieved something.
Click to expand...

Education, wages, residence, stolen assets.
The Germans were the first Wikipedia.
Too many people think every survivor got a fist full of dollars by e-mailng the German government.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Less time than the centuries it took for whites to get their acts together when they had white only AA.
> 
> 
> 
> The question concerning late 20th/early 21st century Black communities remains yet unanswered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What question is that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enjoy your fantasy of why *you* can’t name one Black community that’s safe after dark.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can name several but I dont understand what that has to do with the fact whites had 3 centuries of white male only affirmative action?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Damned!  I thought you were referring to Alcoholics Anonymous.  Silly me!  AA is pretty much color blind, you know.
Click to expand...

Not the AA that whites enjoyed for 300 years here in the US. Even now white women benefit the most from current AA.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> 
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The slaves got sold by their families, fed and clothed by their masters for performing blue color work.
> 
> I guess Hispanics picking fruit should be paid $50.00/hour.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit comparison.  You compate slavery to wage labor?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then conduct a seance and discuss the matter with their ancestors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?  Comparing slavery to free labor is like comparing concentration camps to immigrsnt detainment centers.  False moral equivalency.
Click to expand...

Who said the labor was free?
Does your local Walmat feed, clothe and house their employees?


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn’t.
> And it hasn’t been off topic for over a week.
> The slaves are dead and Dead Holocaust survivors descendants don’t get restitution.
> There is *no* precedent for this nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Their descendents are not getting anything...descendents should not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should the descendants not get anything? It was owed to the survivors who were unable to pass it on to their descendants.
Click to expand...

Will you inherit the monies your parents paid into Social Security if your parents never lived long enough to collect what they paid into that fund?  Why not?  That was money earned by your parents and contributed to a fund intended for their "retirement".  Why should the descendants of those contributors not inherit the money left unpaid?


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> 
> 
> The slaves got sold by their families, fed and clothed by their masters for performing blue color work.
> 
> I guess Hispanics picking fruit should be paid $50.00/hour.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bullshit comparison.  You compate slavery to wage labor?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then conduct a seance and discuss the matter with their ancestors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?  Comparing slavery to free labor is like comparing concentration camps to immigrsnt detainment centers.  False moral equivalency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who said the labor was free?
> Does your local Walmat feed, clothe and house their employees?
Click to expand...


Substandard food, forced breeding, brutal whippings, substandard housing and white male right to rape...sounds like the owners took far more than labor.  I had no idea thete were slavery deniers like there are holocast deniers.  That is a new one.


----------



## Indeependent

My restitution to Blacks is my tax dollars that I want to have police provide a safe school and home environment and a neighborhood I can go to after work and shop.
A neighborhood that will produce well educated adults and add to Americans greatness.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes its off topic moron.
> 
> Why would the Holocaust survivors descendants get reparations when the survivors already got it? Are you some kind of idiot?
> 
> Germany increases reparations for Holocaust survivors
> 
> Theres plenty of precedent.
> 
> 
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Their descendents are not getting anything...descendents should not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should the descendants not get anything? It was owed to the survivors who were unable to pass it on to their descendants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Will you inherit the monies your parents paid into Social Security if your parents never lived long enough to collect what they paid into that fund?  Why not?  That was money earned by your parents and contributed to a fund intended for their "retirement".  Why should the descendants of those contributors not inherit the money left unpaid?
Click to expand...

False equivalence. SS by definition is not the same thing as money invested and used to assist your specific dependants. SS is a required tax.  If it was up to me it would be given to the descendants..


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The slaves got sold by their families, fed and clothed by their masters for performing blue color work.
> 
> I guess Hispanics picking fruit should be paid $50.00/hour.
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit comparison.  You compate slavery to wage labor?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then conduct a seance and discuss the matter with their ancestors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?  Comparing slavery to free labor is like comparing concentration camps to immigrsnt detainment centers.  False moral equivalency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who said the labor was free?
> Does your local Walmat feed, clothe and house their employees?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Substandard food, forced breeding, brutal whippings, substandard housing and white male right to rape...sounds like the owners took far more than labor.  I had no idea thete were slavery deniers like there are holocast deniers.  That is a new one.
Click to expand...

Just like most Black areas today with all of their freedoms going to waste.
I’m not denying slavery; I’m denying the revisionist view of it lying only on all White people and asking why they haven’t taken advantage of the opportunity to catch up.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit comparison.  You compate slavery to wage labor?
> 
> 
> 
> Then conduct a seance and discuss the matter with their ancestors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?  Comparing slavery to free labor is like comparing concentration camps to immigrsnt detainment centers.  False moral equivalency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who said the labor was free?
> Does your local Walmat feed, clothe and house their employees?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Substandard food, forced breeding, brutal whippings, substandard housing and white male right to rape...sounds like the owners took far more than labor.  I had no idea thete were slavery deniers like there are holocast deniers.  That is a new one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like most Black areas today with all of their freedoms going to waste.
> I’m not denying slavery; I’m denying the revisionist view of it lying only on all White people and asking why they haven’t taken advantage of the opportunity to catch up.
Click to expand...

Whites were totally in control of this country when chattel slavery was practiced.
Dont ask why. Just understand since you had 3 centuries of white only AA then we only need half that time to surpass you if given Black only AA.


----------



## gallantwarrior

And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then conduct a seance and discuss the matter with their ancestors.
> 
> 
> 
> Why?  Comparing slavery to free labor is like comparing concentration camps to immigrsnt detainment centers.  False moral equivalency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who said the labor was free?
> Does your local Walmat feed, clothe and house their employees?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Substandard food, forced breeding, brutal whippings, substandard housing and white male right to rape...sounds like the owners took far more than labor.  I had no idea thete were slavery deniers like there are holocast deniers.  That is a new one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like most Black areas today with all of their freedoms going to waste.
> I’m not denying slavery; I’m denying the revisionist view of it lying only on all White people and asking why they haven’t taken advantage of the opportunity to catch up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites were totally in control of this country when chattel slavery was practiced.
> Dont ask why. Just understand if you had 3 centuries of white only AA then we only need half that time to surpass you if given Black only AA.
Click to expand...

Are you inebriated?
Seriously, WTF are you babbling about?
Until the late 90s I couldn’t wear a yalmulke on Wall Street and get a job.
It’s 2018.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?


I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.
Click to expand...

That’s gonna be a trick.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why?  Comparing slavery to free labor is like comparing concentration camps to immigrsnt detainment centers.  False moral equivalency.
> 
> 
> 
> Who said the labor was free?
> Does your local Walmat feed, clothe and house their employees?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Substandard food, forced breeding, brutal whippings, substandard housing and white male right to rape...sounds like the owners took far more than labor.  I had no idea thete were slavery deniers like there are holocast deniers.  That is a new one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like most Black areas today with all of their freedoms going to waste.
> I’m not denying slavery; I’m denying the revisionist view of it lying only on all White people and asking why they haven’t taken advantage of the opportunity to catch up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites were totally in control of this country when chattel slavery was practiced.
> Dont ask why. Just understand if you had 3 centuries of white only AA then we only need half that time to surpass you if given Black only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you inebriated?
> Seriously, WTF are you babbling about?
> Until the late 90s I couldn’t wear a yalmulke on Wall Street and get a job.
> It’s 2018.
Click to expand...

I bet you could get a job easier than a Black guy even if you wore a yarmulke.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s gonna be a trick.
Click to expand...

Whats gonna be a trick?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who said the labor was free?
> Does your local Walmat feed, clothe and house their employees?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Substandard food, forced breeding, brutal whippings, substandard housing and white male right to rape...sounds like the owners took far more than labor.  I had no idea thete were slavery deniers like there are holocast deniers.  That is a new one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like most Black areas today with all of their freedoms going to waste.
> I’m not denying slavery; I’m denying the revisionist view of it lying only on all White people and asking why they haven’t taken advantage of the opportunity to catch up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites were totally in control of this country when chattel slavery was practiced.
> Dont ask why. Just understand if you had 3 centuries of white only AA then we only need half that time to surpass you if given Black only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you inebriated?
> Seriously, WTF are you babbling about?
> Until the late 90s I couldn’t wear a yalmulke on Wall Street and get a job.
> It’s 2018.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I bet you could get a job easier than a Black guy even if you wore a yarmulke.
Click to expand...

Probably; that’s racist and assumptions based on Jews being productive and living in thriving neighborhoods.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s gonna be a trick.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whats gonna be a trick?
Click to expand...

The White trash that owned slaves did not keep records like the uber educated and organized Germans.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> My restitution to Blacks is my tax dollars that I want to have police provide a safe school and home environment and a neighborhood I can go to after work and shop.
> A neighborhood that will produce well educated adults and add to Americans greatness.


That does nothing for the lost interest and immediate benefit to Black wealth.  its like trying to water the Sahara desert with a drop of spit.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> My restitution to Blacks is my tax dollars that I want to have police provide a safe school and home environment and a neighborhood I can go to after work and shop.
> A neighborhood that will produce well educated adults and add to Americans greatness.
> 
> 
> 
> That does nothing for the lost interest and immediate benefit to Black wealth.  its like trying to water the Sahara desert with a drop of spit.
Click to expand...

You’ve had 50 years.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Substandard food, forced breeding, brutal whippings, substandard housing and white male right to rape...sounds like the owners took far more than labor.  I had no idea thete were slavery deniers like there are holocast deniers.  That is a new one.
> 
> 
> 
> Just like most Black areas today with all of their freedoms going to waste.
> I’m not denying slavery; I’m denying the revisionist view of it lying only on all White people and asking why they haven’t taken advantage of the opportunity to catch up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites were totally in control of this country when chattel slavery was practiced.
> Dont ask why. Just understand if you had 3 centuries of white only AA then we only need half that time to surpass you if given Black only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you inebriated?
> Seriously, WTF are you babbling about?
> Until the late 90s I couldn’t wear a yalmulke on Wall Street and get a job.
> It’s 2018.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I bet you could get a job easier than a Black guy even if you wore a yarmulke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Probably; that’s racist and assumptions based on Jews being productive and living in thriving neighborhoods.
Click to expand...

Nope. Its just based on present day Jews being white europeans and benefiting from white AA.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> My restitution to Blacks is my tax dollars that I want to have police provide a safe school and home environment and a neighborhood I can go to after work and shop.
> A neighborhood that will produce well educated adults and add to Americans greatness.
> 
> 
> 
> That does nothing for the lost interest and immediate benefit to Black wealth.  its like trying to water the Sahara desert with a drop of spit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You’ve had 50 years.
Click to expand...

You've had 300 years of white only AA. We only need half that and again those 50 years dont count since it was never Black only.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s gonna be a trick.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whats gonna be a trick?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The White trash that owned slaves did not keep records like the uber educated and organized Germans.
Click to expand...

Typically it wasnt white trash that owned slaves. They couldnt afford it. It was wealthy white men that kept records.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just like most Black areas today with all of their freedoms going to waste.
> I’m not denying slavery; I’m denying the revisionist view of it lying only on all White people and asking why they haven’t taken advantage of the opportunity to catch up.
> 
> 
> 
> Whites were totally in control of this country when chattel slavery was practiced.
> Dont ask why. Just understand if you had 3 centuries of white only AA then we only need half that time to surpass you if given Black only AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you inebriated?
> Seriously, WTF are you babbling about?
> Until the late 90s I couldn’t wear a yalmulke on Wall Street and get a job.
> It’s 2018.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I bet you could get a job easier than a Black guy even if you wore a yarmulke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Probably; that’s racist and assumptions based on Jews being productive and living in thriving neighborhoods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its just based on present day Jews being white europeans and benefiting from white AA.
Click to expand...

Do you know why so many Jews own businesses?
No one would hire us for 50 years.

Do you see Jewish areas in Flatbush, Boro Park, Williamsburg and Nassau County?
We don’t live for ourselves, we live for our children.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> My restitution to Blacks is my tax dollars that I want to have police provide a safe school and home environment and a neighborhood I can go to after work and shop.
> A neighborhood that will produce well educated adults and add to Americans greatness.
> 
> 
> 
> That does nothing for the lost interest and immediate benefit to Black wealth.  its like trying to water the Sahara desert with a drop of spit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You’ve had 50 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You've had 300 years of white only AA. We only need half that and again those 50 years dont count since it was never Black only.
Click to expand...

You are a crybaby racist.
You could have developed the areas you live in and people would run to shop.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whites were totally in control of this country when chattel slavery was practiced.
> Dont ask why. Just understand if you had 3 centuries of white only AA then we only need half that time to surpass you if given Black only AA.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you inebriated?
> Seriously, WTF are you babbling about?
> Until the late 90s I couldn’t wear a yalmulke on Wall Street and get a job.
> It’s 2018.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I bet you could get a job easier than a Black guy even if you wore a yarmulke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Probably; that’s racist and assumptions based on Jews being productive and living in thriving neighborhoods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its just based on present day Jews being white europeans and benefiting from white AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you know why so many Jews own businesses?
> No one would hire us for 50 years.
> 
> Do you see Jewish areas in Flatbush, Boro Park, Williamsburg and Nassau County?
> We don’t live for ourselves, we live for our children.
Click to expand...

Of course I do. You were helped   When Blacks had their own businesses whites like you burned them to the ground.


----------



## Indeependent

Jews couldn’t get into medical school and so was born Einstein Medical School.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you inebriated?
> Seriously, WTF are you babbling about?
> Until the late 90s I couldn’t wear a yalmulke on Wall Street and get a job.
> It’s 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> I bet you could get a job easier than a Black guy even if you wore a yarmulke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Probably; that’s racist and assumptions based on Jews being productive and living in thriving neighborhoods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its just based on present day Jews being white europeans and benefiting from white AA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you know why so many Jews own businesses?
> No one would hire us for 50 years.
> 
> Do you see Jewish areas in Flatbush, Boro Park, Williamsburg and Nassau County?
> We don’t live for ourselves, we live for our children.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course I do. You were helped   When Blacks had their own businesses whites like you burned them to the ground.
Click to expand...

How many Black businesses have been burnt to the ground in NYC since 1967?


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> My restitution to Blacks is my tax dollars that I want to have police provide a safe school and home environment and a neighborhood I can go to after work and shop.
> A neighborhood that will produce well educated adults and add to Americans greatness.
> 
> 
> 
> That does nothing for the lost interest and immediate benefit to Black wealth.  its like trying to water the Sahara desert with a drop of spit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You’ve had 50 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You've had 300 years of white only AA. We only need half that and again those 50 years dont count since it was never Black only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are a crybaby racist.
> You could have developed the areas you live in and people would run to shop.
Click to expand...

We did develop our areas. Whites burned them to the ground when they became more affluent than white areas. Thats how I know we only need half the time with Black only AA to surpass you whites.


----------



## Indeependent

I’m getting bored.
I’ll be back later to read more bullshit.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> I’m getting bored.
> I’ll be back later to read more bullshit.


Youre getting owned. 

Take some time off and come back with a better argument.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because the Jew were citizens, they were highly educated and contributed to every facet of society at every level and their property, assets and possessions were stolen.
> 
> *That’s* why they received payment.
> 
> 
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Their descendents are not getting anything...descendents should not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should the descendants not get anything? It was owed to the survivors who were unable to pass it on to their descendants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Will you inherit the monies your parents paid into Social Security if your parents never lived long enough to collect what they paid into that fund?  Why not?  That was money earned by your parents and contributed to a fund intended for their "retirement".  Why should the descendants of those contributors not inherit the money left unpaid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> False equivalence. SS by definition is not the same thing as money invested and used to assist your specific dependants. SS is a required tax.  If it was up to me it would be given to the descendants..
Click to expand...

Although billed as a tax, it is a forced contribution to a retirement fund administered by government.  If you had the choice of contributing to a private fund, any money held on account at your death would accrue to your estate.  So, yes, I suppose it is somewhat different because a definite amount of money has been contributed and will never be distributed to the heirs of the deceased.  Hence, the government has stolen some amount of money from the citizens.  
Reparations for descendants of slaves features no specific fund designated for that dispersal.  So, you have no fund designated for that purpose.  Your solution is to force all current taxpayers to make some contrition to your fund.  OK, you have identified a source for your reparations.  The question remains: who should receive reparations and how much?  What data do you propose to use to calculate the amount to be dispersed?


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> So if they received payment already why would their descendants get anything? What kind of idiot makes that comparison with the enslaved that never got their wages?
> 
> 
> 
> Their descendents are not getting anything...descendents should not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should the descendants not get anything? It was owed to the survivors who were unable to pass it on to their descendants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Will you inherit the monies your parents paid into Social Security if your parents never lived long enough to collect what they paid into that fund?  Why not?  That was money earned by your parents and contributed to a fund intended for their "retirement".  Why should the descendants of those contributors not inherit the money left unpaid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> False equivalence. SS by definition is not the same thing as money invested and used to assist your specific dependants. SS is a required tax.  If it was up to me it would be given to the descendants..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Although billed as a tax, it is a forced contribution to a retirement fund administered by government.  If you had the choice of contributing to a private fund, any money held on account at your death would accrue to your estate.  So, yes, I suppose it is somewhat different because a definite amount of money has been contributed and will never be distributed to the heirs of the deceased.  Hence, the government has stolen some amount of money from the citizens.
> Reparations for descendants of slaves features no specific fund designated for that dispersal.  So, you have no fund designated for that purpose.  Your solution is to force all current taxpayers to make some contrition to your fund.  OK, you have identified a source for your reparations.  The question remains: who should receive reparations and how much?  What data do you propose to use to calculate the amount to be dispersed?
Click to expand...

Key word is "forced".  Therefore its out of your control just like a tax.
Reparations were paid to the Japanese and there was no problem creating a fund. Reparations were paid to some of the descendants of Rosewood and again there was no issue creating a fund. Lack of motivation to do a task is not an acceptable reason as to why it shouldnt be done.  I already told you who should get the funds. How much is still to be determined.  First there would need to be an agreement to even explore the topic. Whites have an almost fanatical opposition to even do that.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.
Click to expand...

OK.  So, those who identify as black and can prove their descendant status are to be designated recipients.  Good.  What percentage of blood relation would you require, or would that be anyone who can prove any relation?  Even those claiming to be Alaskan Natives must have a certain percentage of blood before being granted status as Natives and thus receive benefits reserved for them. 
_“’Native’ means a citizen of the United States who is a person of one-fourth degree or more Alaska Indian (including Tsimshian Indians not enrolled in the Metlakatla Indian Community) Eskimo, or Aleut blood, or combination thereof. The term includes any Natives as so defined either or both of whose adoptive parents are not Natives. It also includes, in the absence of proof of a minimum blood quantum, any citizen of the United States who is regarded as an Alaska Native by the Native village or Native group of which he claims to be a member and whose father or mother is (or, if deceased, was) regarded as Native by any village or group.”_
http://www.sealaskaheritage.org/sites/default/files/MMPAFinalReport.pdf


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK.  So, those who identify as black and can prove their descendant status are to be designated recipients.  Good.  What percentage of blood relation would you require, or would that be anyone who can prove any relation?  Even those claiming to be Alaskan Natives must have a certain percentage of blood before being granted status as Natives and thus receive benefits reserved for them.
> _“’Native’ means a citizen of the United States who is a person of one-fourth degree or more Alaska Indian (including Tsimshian Indians not enrolled in the Metlakatla Indian Community) Eskimo, or Aleut blood, or combination thereof. The term includes any Natives as so defined either or both of whose adoptive parents are not Natives. It also includes, in the absence of proof of a minimum blood quantum, any citizen of the United States who is regarded as an Alaska Native by the Native village or Native group of which he claims to be a member and whose father or mother is (or, if deceased, was) regarded as Native by any village or group.”_
> http://www.sealaskaheritage.org/sites/default/files/MMPAFinalReport.pdf
Click to expand...

Nope. Just those that ID as Black, can prove their ancestors were enslaved and have at least 15%-20% Black DNA. You dont claim your Blackness you get nothing.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Their descendents are not getting anything...descendents should not.
> 
> 
> 
> Why should the descendants not get anything? It was owed to the survivors who were unable to pass it on to their descendants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Will you inherit the monies your parents paid into Social Security if your parents never lived long enough to collect what they paid into that fund?  Why not?  That was money earned by your parents and contributed to a fund intended for their "retirement".  Why should the descendants of those contributors not inherit the money left unpaid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> False equivalence. SS by definition is not the same thing as money invested and used to assist your specific dependants. SS is a required tax.  If it was up to me it would be given to the descendants..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Although billed as a tax, it is a forced contribution to a retirement fund administered by government.  If you had the choice of contributing to a private fund, any money held on account at your death would accrue to your estate.  So, yes, I suppose it is somewhat different because a definite amount of money has been contributed and will never be distributed to the heirs of the deceased.  Hence, the government has stolen some amount of money from the citizens.
> Reparations for descendants of slaves features no specific fund designated for that dispersal.  So, you have no fund designated for that purpose.  Your solution is to force all current taxpayers to make some contrition to your fund.  OK, you have identified a source for your reparations.  The question remains: who should receive reparations and how much?  What data do you propose to use to calculate the amount to be dispersed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Key word is "forced".  Therefore its out of your control just like a tax.
> Reparations were paid to the Japanese and there was no problem creating a fund. Reparations were paid to some of the descendants of Rosewood and again there was no issue creating a fund. Lack of motivation to do a task is not an acceptable reason as to why it shouldnt be done.  I already told you who should get the funds. How much is still to be determined.  First there would need to be an agreement to even explore the topic. Whites have an almost fanatical opposition to even do that.
Click to expand...

I hadn't had time to get your definition of who, but have responded since then.  I started this thread to discuss the who should pay, who should get, and how much.  You have now identified who should pay: taxpayers; who should receive: all who identify and can prove being of slave-descended stock.  "In the billions" may be true, but how would you derive the amount paid to each individual?  What basis would you use to calculate that amount?


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why should the descendants not get anything? It was owed to the survivors who were unable to pass it on to their descendants.
> 
> 
> 
> Will you inherit the monies your parents paid into Social Security if your parents never lived long enough to collect what they paid into that fund?  Why not?  That was money earned by your parents and contributed to a fund intended for their "retirement".  Why should the descendants of those contributors not inherit the money left unpaid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> False equivalence. SS by definition is not the same thing as money invested and used to assist your specific dependants. SS is a required tax.  If it was up to me it would be given to the descendants..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Although billed as a tax, it is a forced contribution to a retirement fund administered by government.  If you had the choice of contributing to a private fund, any money held on account at your death would accrue to your estate.  So, yes, I suppose it is somewhat different because a definite amount of money has been contributed and will never be distributed to the heirs of the deceased.  Hence, the government has stolen some amount of money from the citizens.
> Reparations for descendants of slaves features no specific fund designated for that dispersal.  So, you have no fund designated for that purpose.  Your solution is to force all current taxpayers to make some contrition to your fund.  OK, you have identified a source for your reparations.  The question remains: who should receive reparations and how much?  What data do you propose to use to calculate the amount to be dispersed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Key word is "forced".  Therefore its out of your control just like a tax.
> Reparations were paid to the Japanese and there was no problem creating a fund. Reparations were paid to some of the descendants of Rosewood and again there was no issue creating a fund. Lack of motivation to do a task is not an acceptable reason as to why it shouldnt be done.  I already told you who should get the funds. How much is still to be determined.  First there would need to be an agreement to even explore the topic. Whites have an almost fanatical opposition to even do that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I hadn't had time to get your definition of who, but have responded since then.  I started this thread to discuss the who should pay, who should get, and how much.  You have now identified who should pay: taxpayers; who should receive: all who identify and can prove being of slave-descended stock.  "In the billions" may be true, but how would you derive the amount paid to each individual?  What basis would you use to calculate that amount?
Click to expand...

I said in the trillions. I would leave those decisions on "how much" etc up to the Black people that are currently fighting for reparations as they have all the data. I'm good with whatever they decide. The main point is that my people could then move on instead of wasting time trying to convince whites to like them.  Once empowered economically they could sink or swim on their own.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK.  So, those who identify as black and can prove their descendant status are to be designated recipients.  Good.  What percentage of blood relation would you require, or would that be anyone who can prove any relation?  Even those claiming to be Alaskan Natives must have a certain percentage of blood before being granted status as Natives and thus receive benefits reserved for them.
> _“’Native’ means a citizen of the United States who is a person of one-fourth degree or more Alaska Indian (including Tsimshian Indians not enrolled in the Metlakatla Indian Community) Eskimo, or Aleut blood, or combination thereof. The term includes any Natives as so defined either or both of whose adoptive parents are not Natives. It also includes, in the absence of proof of a minimum blood quantum, any citizen of the United States who is regarded as an Alaska Native by the Native village or Native group of which he claims to be a member and whose father or mother is (or, if deceased, was) regarded as Native by any village or group.”_
> http://www.sealaskaheritage.org/sites/default/files/MMPAFinalReport.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Just those that ID as Black, can prove their ancestors were enslaved and have at least 15%-20% Black DNA. You dont claim your Blackness you get nothing.
Click to expand...

But only ancestors enslaved in the US?  
So, only those identifying as black and able to provide at least 15%-20% black DNA, and able to prove ancestors having been enslaved (in the US) would qualify for reparations payments.  That all seems fair enough.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK.  So, those who identify as black and can prove their descendant status are to be designated recipients.  Good.  What percentage of blood relation would you require, or would that be anyone who can prove any relation?  Even those claiming to be Alaskan Natives must have a certain percentage of blood before being granted status as Natives and thus receive benefits reserved for them.
> _“’Native’ means a citizen of the United States who is a person of one-fourth degree or more Alaska Indian (including Tsimshian Indians not enrolled in the Metlakatla Indian Community) Eskimo, or Aleut blood, or combination thereof. The term includes any Natives as so defined either or both of whose adoptive parents are not Natives. It also includes, in the absence of proof of a minimum blood quantum, any citizen of the United States who is regarded as an Alaska Native by the Native village or Native group of which he claims to be a member and whose father or mother is (or, if deceased, was) regarded as Native by any village or group.”_
> http://www.sealaskaheritage.org/sites/default/files/MMPAFinalReport.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Just those that ID as Black, can prove their ancestors were enslaved and have at least 15%-20% Black DNA. You dont claim your Blackness you get nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But only ancestors enslaved in the US?
> So, only those identifying as black and able to provide at least 15%-20% black DNA, and able to prove ancestors having been enslaved (in the US) would qualify for reparations payments.  That all seems fair enough.
Click to expand...

Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.


----------



## TNHarley

What about the descendents of slaves that were enslaved by blacks? Who pays them?


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Will you inherit the monies your parents paid into Social Security if your parents never lived long enough to collect what they paid into that fund?  Why not?  That was money earned by your parents and contributed to a fund intended for their "retirement".  Why should the descendants of those contributors not inherit the money left unpaid?
> 
> 
> 
> False equivalence. SS by definition is not the same thing as money invested and used to assist your specific dependants. SS is a required tax.  If it was up to me it would be given to the descendants..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Although billed as a tax, it is a forced contribution to a retirement fund administered by government.  If you had the choice of contributing to a private fund, any money held on account at your death would accrue to your estate.  So, yes, I suppose it is somewhat different because a definite amount of money has been contributed and will never be distributed to the heirs of the deceased.  Hence, the government has stolen some amount of money from the citizens.
> Reparations for descendants of slaves features no specific fund designated for that dispersal.  So, you have no fund designated for that purpose.  Your solution is to force all current taxpayers to make some contrition to your fund.  OK, you have identified a source for your reparations.  The question remains: who should receive reparations and how much?  What data do you propose to use to calculate the amount to be dispersed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Key word is "forced".  Therefore its out of your control just like a tax.
> Reparations were paid to the Japanese and there was no problem creating a fund. Reparations were paid to some of the descendants of Rosewood and again there was no issue creating a fund. Lack of motivation to do a task is not an acceptable reason as to why it shouldnt be done.  I already told you who should get the funds. How much is still to be determined.  First there would need to be an agreement to even explore the topic. Whites have an almost fanatical opposition to even do that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I hadn't had time to get your definition of who, but have responded since then.  I started this thread to discuss the who should pay, who should get, and how much.  You have now identified who should pay: taxpayers; who should receive: all who identify and can prove being of slave-descended stock.  "In the billions" may be true, but how would you derive the amount paid to each individual?  What basis would you use to calculate that amount?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said in the trillions. I would leave those decisions on "how much" etc up to the Black people that are currently fighting for reparations as they have all the data. I'm good with whatever they decide. The main point is that my people could then move on instead of wasting time trying to convince whites to like them.  Once empowered economically they could sink or swim on their own.
Click to expand...

Sorry..._trillions._  Dude, I thought you were at the forefront of this fight, you are pretty passionate.
Now you bring up a new facet of your proposal.  How would the repayment of reparations empower the black community to move on and change their communities when AA (Affirmative Action), and other programs have not?


----------



## Asclepias

TNHarley said:


> What about the descendents of slaves that were enslaved by blacks? Who pays them?


The vast majority of Black slave owners were that in name only. They bought their family members so whites couldnt claim them.  Irregardless they or their ancestors were owned by whites prior to the Black slave owner so they would still get paid.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> False equivalence. SS by definition is not the same thing as money invested and used to assist your specific dependants. SS is a required tax.  If it was up to me it would be given to the descendants..
> 
> 
> 
> Although billed as a tax, it is a forced contribution to a retirement fund administered by government.  If you had the choice of contributing to a private fund, any money held on account at your death would accrue to your estate.  So, yes, I suppose it is somewhat different because a definite amount of money has been contributed and will never be distributed to the heirs of the deceased.  Hence, the government has stolen some amount of money from the citizens.
> Reparations for descendants of slaves features no specific fund designated for that dispersal.  So, you have no fund designated for that purpose.  Your solution is to force all current taxpayers to make some contrition to your fund.  OK, you have identified a source for your reparations.  The question remains: who should receive reparations and how much?  What data do you propose to use to calculate the amount to be dispersed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Key word is "forced".  Therefore its out of your control just like a tax.
> Reparations were paid to the Japanese and there was no problem creating a fund. Reparations were paid to some of the descendants of Rosewood and again there was no issue creating a fund. Lack of motivation to do a task is not an acceptable reason as to why it shouldnt be done.  I already told you who should get the funds. How much is still to be determined.  First there would need to be an agreement to even explore the topic. Whites have an almost fanatical opposition to even do that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I hadn't had time to get your definition of who, but have responded since then.  I started this thread to discuss the who should pay, who should get, and how much.  You have now identified who should pay: taxpayers; who should receive: all who identify and can prove being of slave-descended stock.  "In the billions" may be true, but how would you derive the amount paid to each individual?  What basis would you use to calculate that amount?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said in the trillions. I would leave those decisions on "how much" etc up to the Black people that are currently fighting for reparations as they have all the data. I'm good with whatever they decide. The main point is that my people could then move on instead of wasting time trying to convince whites to like them.  Once empowered economically they could sink or swim on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry..._trillions._  Dude, I thought you were at the forefront of this fight, you are pretty passionate.
> Now you bring up a new facet of your proposal.  How would the repayment of reparations empower the black community to move on and change their communities when AA (Affirmative Action), and other programs have not?
Click to expand...

Not quite understanding your question?  You do realize AA mostly benefits whites and the little AA Blacks do get has been a benefit


----------



## TNHarley

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about the descendents of slaves that were enslaved by blacks? Who pays them?
> 
> 
> 
> The vast majority of Black slave owners were that in name only. They bought their family members so whites couldnt claim them.  Irregardless they or their ancestors were owned by whites prior to the Black slave owner so they would still get paid.
Click to expand...

Do the people that sold them have to pay anything? They have some responsibility, dont they?


----------



## Asclepias

TNHarley said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about the descendents of slaves that were enslaved by blacks? Who pays them?
> 
> 
> 
> The vast majority of Black slave owners were that in name only. They bought their family members so whites couldnt claim them.  Irregardless they or their ancestors were owned by whites prior to the Black slave owner so they would still get paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do the people that sold them have to pay anything? They have some responsibility, dont they?
Click to expand...

Nope. This is a debt the country owes to Blacks. Its not an individual thing.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK.  So, those who identify as black and can prove their descendant status are to be designated recipients.  Good.  What percentage of blood relation would you require, or would that be anyone who can prove any relation?  Even those claiming to be Alaskan Natives must have a certain percentage of blood before being granted status as Natives and thus receive benefits reserved for them.
> _“’Native’ means a citizen of the United States who is a person of one-fourth degree or more Alaska Indian (including Tsimshian Indians not enrolled in the Metlakatla Indian Community) Eskimo, or Aleut blood, or combination thereof. The term includes any Natives as so defined either or both of whose adoptive parents are not Natives. It also includes, in the absence of proof of a minimum blood quantum, any citizen of the United States who is regarded as an Alaska Native by the Native village or Native group of which he claims to be a member and whose father or mother is (or, if deceased, was) regarded as Native by any village or group.”_
> http://www.sealaskaheritage.org/sites/default/files/MMPAFinalReport.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Just those that ID as Black, can prove their ancestors were enslaved and have at least 15%-20% Black DNA. You dont claim your Blackness you get nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But only ancestors enslaved in the US?
> So, only those identifying as black and able to provide at least 15%-20% black DNA, and able to prove ancestors having been enslaved (in the US) would qualify for reparations payments.  That all seems fair enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.
Click to expand...

Okay!  We agree again!
Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.  
My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Although billed as a tax, it is a forced contribution to a retirement fund administered by government.  If you had the choice of contributing to a private fund, any money held on account at your death would accrue to your estate.  So, yes, I suppose it is somewhat different because a definite amount of money has been contributed and will never be distributed to the heirs of the deceased.  Hence, the government has stolen some amount of money from the citizens.
> Reparations for descendants of slaves features no specific fund designated for that dispersal.  So, you have no fund designated for that purpose.  Your solution is to force all current taxpayers to make some contrition to your fund.  OK, you have identified a source for your reparations.  The question remains: who should receive reparations and how much?  What data do you propose to use to calculate the amount to be dispersed?
> 
> 
> 
> Key word is "forced".  Therefore its out of your control just like a tax.
> Reparations were paid to the Japanese and there was no problem creating a fund. Reparations were paid to some of the descendants of Rosewood and again there was no issue creating a fund. Lack of motivation to do a task is not an acceptable reason as to why it shouldnt be done.  I already told you who should get the funds. How much is still to be determined.  First there would need to be an agreement to even explore the topic. Whites have an almost fanatical opposition to even do that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I hadn't had time to get your definition of who, but have responded since then.  I started this thread to discuss the who should pay, who should get, and how much.  You have now identified who should pay: taxpayers; who should receive: all who identify and can prove being of slave-descended stock.  "In the billions" may be true, but how would you derive the amount paid to each individual?  What basis would you use to calculate that amount?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said in the trillions. I would leave those decisions on "how much" etc up to the Black people that are currently fighting for reparations as they have all the data. I'm good with whatever they decide. The main point is that my people could then move on instead of wasting time trying to convince whites to like them.  Once empowered economically they could sink or swim on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry..._trillions._  Dude, I thought you were at the forefront of this fight, you are pretty passionate.
> Now you bring up a new facet of your proposal.  How would the repayment of reparations empower the black community to move on and change their communities when AA (Affirmative Action), and other programs have not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not quite understanding your question?  You do realize AA mostly benefits whites and the little AA Blacks do get has been a benefit
Click to expand...

AA (Alcoholics Anonymous) or AA (Affirmative Action)?  If we're talking about Affirmative Action, you might want to clarify how more whites have benefited than people of color.  I may have missed something along the way. Thanks.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about the descendents of slaves that were enslaved by blacks? Who pays them?
> 
> 
> 
> The vast majority of Black slave owners were that in name only. They bought their family members so whites couldnt claim them.  Irregardless they or their ancestors were owned by whites prior to the Black slave owner so they would still get paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do the people that sold them have to pay anything? They have some responsibility, dont they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. This is a debt the country owes to Blacks. Its not an individual thing.
Click to expand...

How does the _country_ owe this "debt"?


----------



## TNHarley

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about the descendents of slaves that were enslaved by blacks? Who pays them?
> 
> 
> 
> The vast majority of Black slave owners were that in name only. They bought their family members so whites couldnt claim them.  Irregardless they or their ancestors were owned by whites prior to the Black slave owner so they would still get paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do the people that sold them have to pay anything? They have some responsibility, dont they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. This is a debt the country owes to Blacks. Its not an individual thing.
Click to expand...

how


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I already posted my personal thoughts of it being at least in the trillions. I also said people that ID as Black americans and can prove they are descendants of the enslaved should receive reparations.
> 
> 
> 
> OK.  So, those who identify as black and can prove their descendant status are to be designated recipients.  Good.  What percentage of blood relation would you require, or would that be anyone who can prove any relation?  Even those claiming to be Alaskan Natives must have a certain percentage of blood before being granted status as Natives and thus receive benefits reserved for them.
> _“’Native’ means a citizen of the United States who is a person of one-fourth degree or more Alaska Indian (including Tsimshian Indians not enrolled in the Metlakatla Indian Community) Eskimo, or Aleut blood, or combination thereof. The term includes any Natives as so defined either or both of whose adoptive parents are not Natives. It also includes, in the absence of proof of a minimum blood quantum, any citizen of the United States who is regarded as an Alaska Native by the Native village or Native group of which he claims to be a member and whose father or mother is (or, if deceased, was) regarded as Native by any village or group.”_
> http://www.sealaskaheritage.org/sites/default/files/MMPAFinalReport.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Just those that ID as Black, can prove their ancestors were enslaved and have at least 15%-20% Black DNA. You dont claim your Blackness you get nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But only ancestors enslaved in the US?
> So, only those identifying as black and able to provide at least 15%-20% black DNA, and able to prove ancestors having been enslaved (in the US) would qualify for reparations payments.  That all seems fair enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
Click to expand...

Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about the descendents of slaves that were enslaved by blacks? Who pays them?
> 
> 
> 
> The vast majority of Black slave owners were that in name only. They bought their family members so whites couldnt claim them.  Irregardless they or their ancestors were owned by whites prior to the Black slave owner so they would still get paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do the people that sold them have to pay anything? They have some responsibility, dont they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. This is a debt the country owes to Blacks. Its not an individual thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does the _country_ owe this "debt"?
Click to expand...

What do you mean? You do realize the country is the one that allowed chattel slavery right?


----------



## TNHarley

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> What about the descendents of slaves that were enslaved by blacks? Who pays them?
> 
> 
> 
> The vast majority of Black slave owners were that in name only. They bought their family members so whites couldnt claim them.  Irregardless they or their ancestors were owned by whites prior to the Black slave owner so they would still get paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do the people that sold them have to pay anything? They have some responsibility, dont they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. This is a debt the country owes to Blacks. Its not an individual thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does the _country_ owe this "debt"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What do you mean? You do realize the country is the one that allowed chattel slavery right?
Click to expand...

Why should i punished for it though? I had nothing to do with it. I was born in 1986.


----------



## Asclepias

TNHarley said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> The vast majority of Black slave owners were that in name only. They bought their family members so whites couldnt claim them.  Irregardless they or their ancestors were owned by whites prior to the Black slave owner so they would still get paid.
> 
> 
> 
> Do the people that sold them have to pay anything? They have some responsibility, dont they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. This is a debt the country owes to Blacks. Its not an individual thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does the _country_ owe this "debt"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What do you mean? You do realize the country is the one that allowed chattel slavery right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should i punished for it though? I had nothing to do with it. I was born in 1986.
Click to expand...

Because you are a part of the US?  I had nothing to do with it either and my taxes would also go to pay for any lump sum distribution.


----------



## TNHarley

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do the people that sold them have to pay anything? They have some responsibility, dont they?
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. This is a debt the country owes to Blacks. Its not an individual thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does the _country_ owe this "debt"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What do you mean? You do realize the country is the one that allowed chattel slavery right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should i punished for it though? I had nothing to do with it. I was born in 1986.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because you are a part of the US?  I had nothing to do with it either and my taxes would also go to pay for any lump sum distribution.
Click to expand...

And?


----------



## Asclepias

TNHarley said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. This is a debt the country owes to Blacks. Its not an individual thing.
> 
> 
> 
> How does the _country_ owe this "debt"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What do you mean? You do realize the country is the one that allowed chattel slavery right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should i punished for it though? I had nothing to do with it. I was born in 1986.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because you are a part of the US?  I had nothing to do with it either and my taxes would also go to pay for any lump sum distribution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And?
Click to expand...

and what?


----------



## TNHarley

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> How does the _country_ owe this "debt"?
> 
> 
> 
> What do you mean? You do realize the country is the one that allowed chattel slavery right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should i punished for it though? I had nothing to do with it. I was born in 1986.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because you are a part of the US?  I had nothing to do with it either and my taxes would also go to pay for any lump sum distribution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> and what?
Click to expand...

And what does my citizenship have to do with paying people back that have been dead for generations when i had nothing to do with it?
Doesnt seem logical. It also seems tyrannical.
Are you a tyrant?


----------



## there4eyeM

there4eyeM said:


> All the soldiers who died in the American Civil War.
> The error of slavery cost America dear.
> Debt paid.


To repeat. The Nation owes no debt for the error that was slavery; it paid dearly for that horrible mistake. If there be others who should pay, the case should be presented.


----------



## Asclepias

TNHarley said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> What do you mean? You do realize the country is the one that allowed chattel slavery right?
> 
> 
> 
> Why should i punished for it though? I had nothing to do with it. I was born in 1986.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because you are a part of the US?  I had nothing to do with it either and my taxes would also go to pay for any lump sum distribution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> and what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what does my citizenship have to do with paying people back that have been dead for generations when i had nothing to do with it?
> Doesnt seem logical. It also seems tyrannical.
> Are you a tyrant?
Click to expand...

Because like I said its a debt the US owes for allowing chattel slavery to exist. Thats extremely logical. What part of my answer confused you?


----------



## TNHarley

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why should i punished for it though? I had nothing to do with it. I was born in 1986.
> 
> 
> 
> Because you are a part of the US?  I had nothing to do with it either and my taxes would also go to pay for any lump sum distribution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> and what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what does my citizenship have to do with paying people back that have been dead for generations when i had nothing to do with it?
> Doesnt seem logical. It also seems tyrannical.
> Are you a tyrant?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because like I said its a debt the US owes for allowing chattel slavery to exist. Thats extremely logical. What part of my answer confused you?
Click to expand...

"The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now. 
I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.


----------



## Asclepias

TNHarley said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because you are a part of the US?  I had nothing to do with it either and my taxes would also go to pay for any lump sum distribution.
> 
> 
> 
> And?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> and what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what does my citizenship have to do with paying people back that have been dead for generations when i had nothing to do with it?
> Doesnt seem logical. It also seems tyrannical.
> Are you a tyrant?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because like I said its a debt the US owes for allowing chattel slavery to exist. Thats extremely logical. What part of my answer confused you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
Click to expand...

That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.


----------



## TNHarley

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> And?
> 
> 
> 
> and what?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what does my citizenship have to do with paying people back that have been dead for generations when i had nothing to do with it?
> Doesnt seem logical. It also seems tyrannical.
> Are you a tyrant?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because like I said its a debt the US owes for allowing chattel slavery to exist. Thats extremely logical. What part of my answer confused you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
Click to expand...

If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many. 
So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.


----------



## Asclepias

TNHarley said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> and what?
> 
> 
> 
> And what does my citizenship have to do with paying people back that have been dead for generations when i had nothing to do with it?
> Doesnt seem logical. It also seems tyrannical.
> Are you a tyrant?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because like I said its a debt the US owes for allowing chattel slavery to exist. Thats extremely logical. What part of my answer confused you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
Click to expand...

The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.


----------



## TNHarley

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what does my citizenship have to do with paying people back that have been dead for generations when i had nothing to do with it?
> Doesnt seem logical. It also seems tyrannical.
> Are you a tyrant?
> 
> 
> 
> Because like I said its a debt the US owes for allowing chattel slavery to exist. Thats extremely logical. What part of my answer confused you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
Click to expand...

What about people that dont have jobs and get free shit from everyone else for existing? Do they have to pay?


----------



## Asclepias

TNHarley said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because like I said its a debt the US owes for allowing chattel slavery to exist. Thats extremely logical. What part of my answer confused you?
> 
> 
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What about people that dont have jobs and get free shit from everyone else for existing? Do they have to pay?
Click to expand...

I think you should have the intellect necessary to answer your own question on that one.


----------



## TNHarley

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
> 
> 
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What about people that dont have jobs and get free shit from everyone else for existing? Do they have to pay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think you should have the intellect necessary to answer your own question on that one.
Click to expand...

They wont owe anything?


----------



## Taz

The value of slavery? it's called the minimum wage.


----------



## Asclepias

TNHarley said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> 
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What about people that dont have jobs and get free shit from everyone else for existing? Do they have to pay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think you should have the intellect necessary to answer your own question on that one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They wont owe anything?
Click to expand...

No one owes anything. Its the debt of the US.


----------



## Taz

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> 
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What about people that dont have jobs and get free shit from everyone else for existing? Do they have to pay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think you should have the intellect necessary to answer your own question on that one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They wont owe anything?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one owes anything. Its the debt of the US.
Click to expand...

That's us, fool.


----------



## TNHarley

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> 
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What about people that dont have jobs and get free shit from everyone else for existing? Do they have to pay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think you should have the intellect necessary to answer your own question on that one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They wont owe anything?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one owes anything. Its the debt of the US.
Click to expand...

So will they have to pay their fair share like everyone else?


----------



## Asclepias

TNHarley said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> 
> 
> What about people that dont have jobs and get free shit from everyone else for existing? Do they have to pay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think you should have the intellect necessary to answer your own question on that one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They wont owe anything?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one owes anything. Its the debt of the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So will they have to pay their fair share like everyone else?
Click to expand...

I dont think you have a grasp on the current tax laws. Please educate yourself and then get back to me on the answer.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK.  So, those who identify as black and can prove their descendant status are to be designated recipients.  Good.  What percentage of blood relation would you require, or would that be anyone who can prove any relation?  Even those claiming to be Alaskan Natives must have a certain percentage of blood before being granted status as Natives and thus receive benefits reserved for them.
> _“’Native’ means a citizen of the United States who is a person of one-fourth degree or more Alaska Indian (including Tsimshian Indians not enrolled in the Metlakatla Indian Community) Eskimo, or Aleut blood, or combination thereof. The term includes any Natives as so defined either or both of whose adoptive parents are not Natives. It also includes, in the absence of proof of a minimum blood quantum, any citizen of the United States who is regarded as an Alaska Native by the Native village or Native group of which he claims to be a member and whose father or mother is (or, if deceased, was) regarded as Native by any village or group.”_
> http://www.sealaskaheritage.org/sites/default/files/MMPAFinalReport.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Just those that ID as Black, can prove their ancestors were enslaved and have at least 15%-20% Black DNA. You dont claim your Blackness you get nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But only ancestors enslaved in the US?
> So, only those identifying as black and able to provide at least 15%-20% black DNA, and able to prove ancestors having been enslaved (in the US) would qualify for reparations payments.  That all seems fair enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
Click to expand...

Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?  
The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.   
But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?


----------



## gallantwarrior

Truth is, reparations were already provided for freed slaves immediately following the conclusion of the Civil War.  A large swath of real estate was confiscated from Southern landowners and earmarked for distribution to any freed slave who applied for a designated portion thereof.  The apportioned land, and subsequent mule, was intended for the freed slave to establish himself and provide for his family.  So, the opportunity for economic stability was available.  Since the original freed slaves were already provided opportunity to claim some portion of real property "provided" by those assumed to have owned slaves, there is no need to pay descendants of slaves any amount of money, regardless of source.

_"Today, we commonly use the phrase "40 acres and a mule," but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: "The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States." 

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: " … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such." 

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: " … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title."

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — "a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John's River in Florida, including Georgia's Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast," as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves. The extent of this Order and its larger implications are mind-boggling, actually."
https://www.theroot.com/the-truth-behind-40-acres-and-a-mule-1790894780_


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Just those that ID as Black, can prove their ancestors were enslaved and have at least 15%-20% Black DNA. You dont claim your Blackness you get nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> But only ancestors enslaved in the US?
> So, only those identifying as black and able to provide at least 15%-20% black DNA, and able to prove ancestors having been enslaved (in the US) would qualify for reparations payments.  That all seems fair enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
Click to expand...

Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.

Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.

The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery. 

You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.

That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> But only ancestors enslaved in the US?
> So, only those identifying as black and able to provide at least 15%-20% black DNA, and able to prove ancestors having been enslaved (in the US) would qualify for reparations payments.  That all seems fair enough.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars. [*A debt is paid by those who owe it.  My neighbor is not responsible to pay my mortgage or car payment.  Therefore, it is disingenuous to demand that any who did not participate in owning or trading slaves in this country be forced to pay for that activity.  Establishing a fund financed by those who did own or trade slaves is the only fair and equitable way to acquire funds to distribute to qualified recipients.] * Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. *[we apparently agree on this point.] *The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later. *[Interesting point, and I agree that the Civil War was about cession.  There are factions who will argue that the division between the Southern states and the Northern was primarily based upon the North wishing to abolish slavery and the South maintaining their right to determine the status of slavery themselves.  That argument goes either way, depending on who you want to believe.]*
> 
> Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.  *[Then the proper action would be to file a class action suit: Plaintiff(s): all blacks qualified as defined vs. Defendant: all US taxpayers.]*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery. *[I'd be most interested to know just how you think all the subsequent waves of immigrants, or Native Americans, have specifically benefited from black slavery.*
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.  *[I wasn't apologizing, I was telling you that I won't apologize because I, and my ancestors, have done nothing to apologize for.  That being said, my descendants and I owe you and your descents nothing.]*
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
Click to expand...


Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars. [*A debt is paid by those who owe it.  My neighbor is not responsible to pay my mortgage or car payment.  Therefore, it is disingenuous to demand that any who did not participate in owning or trading slaves in this country be forced to pay for that activity.  Establishing a fund financed by those who did own or trade slaves is the only fair and equitable way to acquire funds to distribute to qualified recipients.] *Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. *[we apparently agree on this point.] *The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later. *[Interesting point, and I agree that the Civil War was about cession.  There are factions who will argue that the division between the Southern states and the Northern was primarily based upon the North wishing to abolish slavery and the South maintaining their right to determine the status of slavery themselves.  That argument goes either way, depending on who you want to believe.]*

Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.  *[Then the proper action would be to file a class action suit: Plaintiff(s): all blacks qualified as defined vs. Defendant: all US taxpayers.]*

The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery. *[I'd be most interested to know just how you think all the subsequent waves of immigrants, or Native Americans, have specifically benefited from black slavery.*

You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.  *[I wasn't apologizing, I was telling you that I won't apologize because I, and my ancestors, have done nothing to apologize for.  That being said, my descendants and I owe you and your descents nothing.]
*
Given the history and success of many government and charitable programs that were intended to help improve black economic advancement, to improve black communities and opportunities, I seriously doubt any additional free money in the form of reparations would be used for anything more than more drugs, booze, and other frivolous stupidity by the greater proportion of recipients.  Those who really want to can break free and make more of themselves, regardless of perceived handicaps.  Consider your black self as a modern day adventurer exploiting new, unexplored frontiers.  Break you own chains, brother if no one else will.


----------



## Coyote

If tax payers pay...then payment is made by all, regardless of race.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> But only ancestors enslaved in the US?
> So, only those identifying as black and able to provide at least 15%-20% black DNA, and able to prove ancestors having been enslaved (in the US) would qualify for reparations payments.  That all seems fair enough.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> *That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.*
Click to expand...


How would it do that?  You are talking about reparations paid to individuals right?


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars. [*A debt is paid by those who owe it.  My neighbor is not responsible to pay my mortgage or car payment.  Therefore, it is disingenuous to demand that any who did not participate in owning or trading slaves in this country be forced to pay for that activity.  Establishing a fund financed by those who did own or trade slaves is the only fair and equitable way to acquire funds to distribute to qualified recipients.] * Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. *[we apparently agree on this point.] *The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later. *[Interesting point, and I agree that the Civil War was about cession.  There are factions who will argue that the division between the Southern states and the Northern was primarily based upon the North wishing to abolish slavery and the South maintaining their right to determine the status of slavery themselves.  That argument goes either way, depending on who you want to believe.]*
> 
> Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.  *[Then the proper action would be to file a class action suit: Plaintiff(s): all blacks qualified as defined vs. Defendant: all US taxpayers.]*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery. *[I'd be most interested to know just how you think all the subsequent waves of immigrants, or Native Americans, have specifically benefited from black slavery.*
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.  *[I wasn't apologizing, I was telling you that I won't apologize because I, and my ancestors, have done nothing to apologize for.  That being said, my descendants and I owe you and your descents nothing.]*
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars. [*A debt is paid by those who owe it.  My neighbor is not responsible to pay my mortgage or car payment.  Therefore, it is disingenuous to demand that any who did not participate in owning or trading slaves in this country be forced to pay for that activity.  Establishing a fund financed by those who did own or trade slaves is the only fair and equitable way to acquire funds to distribute to qualified recipients.] *Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. *[we apparently agree on this point.] *The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later. *[Interesting point, and I agree that the Civil War was about cession.  There are factions who will argue that the division between the Southern states and the Northern was primarily based upon the North wishing to abolish slavery and the South maintaining their right to determine the status of slavery themselves.  That argument goes either way, depending on who you want to believe.]*
> 
> Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.  *[Then the proper action would be to file a class action suit: Plaintiff(s): all blacks qualified as defined vs. Defendant: all US taxpayers.]*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery. *[I'd be most interested to know just how you think all the subsequent waves of immigrants, or Native Americans, have specifically benefited from black slavery.*
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.  *[I wasn't apologizing, I was telling you that I won't apologize because I, and my ancestors, have done nothing to apologize for.  That being said, my descendants and I owe you and your descents nothing.]
> *
> Given the history and success of many government and charitable programs that were intended to help improve black economic advancement, to improve black communities and opportunities, I seriously doubt any additional free money in the form of reparations would be used for anything more than more drugs, booze, and other frivolous stupidity by the greater proportion of recipients.  Those who really want to can break free and make more of themselves, regardless of perceived handicaps.  Consider your black self as a modern day adventurer exploiting new, unexplored frontiers.  Break you own chains, brother if no one else will.
Click to expand...

Since the US owes the debt then it will be paid by whoever currently pays taxes.  Your analogy is an example in false logic. The US is not your neighbor. The only way that works is if I said Canada owed reparations to US Blacks.

I know you werent apologizing. I was just saying I would disregard it if you did.  Correct. The US owes the debt. Not you specifically.

I'm not concerned with what you doubt. I'm not even concerned if you agree. My point is that the US owes the debt and therefore should pay. This probably wont happen for any and all of the excuses presented on this thread but no one will ever convince me to agree with such silly excuses.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> *That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How would it do that?  You are talking about reparations paid to individuals right?
Click to expand...

Yes. Money paid to individuals is still counted as wealth.  If most Black people are millionaires the wealth gap goes away.


----------



## miketx

gallantwarrior said:


> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?


No one today was a slave. To hell with them.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> 
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> *That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How would it do that?  You are talking about reparations paid to individuals right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. Money paid to individuals is still counted as wealth.  If most Black people are millionaires the wealth gap goes away.
Click to expand...

Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)


----------



## Asclepias

miketx said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> No one today was a slave. To hell with them.
Click to expand...

Your reading comprehension tests must have all been disasters? This is about the descendants of the enslaved.


----------



## miketx

Asclepias said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> No one today was a slave. To hell with them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your reading comprehension tests must have all been disasters? This is about the descendants of the enslaved.
Click to expand...

To hell with them too. We don't owe you anything.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> 
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> *That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How would it do that?  You are talking about reparations paid to individuals right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. Money paid to individuals is still counted as wealth.  If most Black people are millionaires the wealth gap goes away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
Click to expand...

My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away. 
No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?


----------



## Asclepias

miketx said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> miketx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would you estimate the value of slavery in the US to have been?
> Specifically, if reparations were to be made for slavery, how much would you estimate the value of lost wages plus interest to be?  Please be specific.  What pay scale would you propose be used, and what amount of interest?
> Who would you propose be paid reparations for slavery in the US?
> And, who would you propose pay into the fund to be dispersed to those deemed recipients of said reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> No one today was a slave. To hell with them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your reading comprehension tests must have all been disasters? This is about the descendants of the enslaved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> To hell with them too. We don't owe you anything.
Click to expand...

You dont owe me anything nor does welfare check cover what I am talking about. The US owes.


----------



## IM2

*A Long History of Affirmative Action - For Whites*

Many middle-class white people, especially those of us from the suburbs, like to think that we got to where we are today by virtue of our merit - hard work, intelligence, pluck, and maybe a little luck. And while we may be sympathetic to the plight of others, we close down when we hear the words "affirmative action" or "racial preferences." We worked hard, we made it on our own, the thinking goes, why don't 'they'? After all, the Civil Rights Act was enacted almost 40 years ago.
*
Early Racial Preferences*

We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. *Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their support and their policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.*

White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. *The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white*, under Homestead Act provisions.

*The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not others.* Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land. Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.

*In the South, the federal government never followed through on General Sherman's Civil War plan to divide up plantations and give each freed slave "40 acres and a mule" as reparations. Only once was monetary compensation made for slavery, in Washington, D.C. There, government officials paid up to $300 per slave upon emancipation - not to the slaves, but to local slaveholders* as compensation for loss of property.

When slavery ended, its legacy lived on not only in the impoverished condition of Black people but in the wealth and prosperity that accrued to white slaveowners and their descendents. *Economists who try to place a dollar value on how much white Americans have profited from 200 years of unpaid slave labor, including interest, begin their estimates at $1 trillion.*

Jim Crow laws, instituted in the late 19th and early 20th century and not overturned in many states until the 1960s, reserved the best jobs, neighborhoods, schools and hospitals for white people.

*The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation*

*The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian.* As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement. They couldn't pass wealth on to their children. Just the opposite. Their children had to support them.

Like Social Security,* the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites* and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions.          

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the* Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.*

*Reaping the Rewards of Racial Preference*

*One result of the generations of preferential treatment for whites is that a typical white family today has on average eight times the assets, or net worth, of a typical African American family, according to economist Edward Wolff. Even when families of the same income are compared, white families have more than twice the wealth of Black families.* Much of that wealth difference can be attributed to the value of one's home, and how much one inherited from parents. 

But a family's net worth is not simply the finish line, it's also the starting point for the next generation. Those with wealth pass their assets on to their children - by financing a college education, lending a hand during hard times, or assisting with the down payment for a home. Some economists estimate that up to 80 percent of lifetime wealth accumulation depends on these intergenerational transfers. White advantage is passed down, from parent to child to grand-child. As a result, the racial wealth gap - and the head start enjoyed by whites - appears to have grown since the civil rights days.

*In 1865, just after Emancipation, it is not surprising that African Americans owned 0.5 percent of the total worth of the United States. But by 1990, a full 135 years after the abolition of slavery, Black Americans still possessed only a meager 1 percent of national wealth.*

Rather than recognize how "racial preferences" have tilted the playing field and given us a head start in life, many whites continue to believe that race does not affect our lives. Instead, we chastise others for not achieving what we have; we even invert the situation and accuse non-whites of using "the race card" to advance themselves.

RACE - The Power of an Illusion | White Advantage

*Over 300 years of white AA and government handouts. And those of you here today have benefitted from many of the more recent forms. We paid income taxes also but our money went to pay for whites to get those government home loans or other programs we were denied.  It's time whites faced the damn truth. What you don't believe is not truth. What you don't think should happen isn't the truth. We paid into a system that only you benefitted from. For that alone we are owed.*


----------



## IM2

Native Americans were not used as slaves after the early 1600's because they could run away and whites could not catch them.


----------



## MizMolly

IM2 said:


> *A Long History of Affirmative Action - For Whites*
> 
> Many middle-class white people, especially those of us from the suburbs, like to think that we got to where we are today by virtue of our merit - hard work, intelligence, pluck, and maybe a little luck. And while we may be sympathetic to the plight of others, we close down when we hear the words "affirmative action" or "racial preferences." We worked hard, we made it on our own, the thinking goes, why don't 'they'? After all, the Civil Rights Act was enacted almost 40 years ago.
> *
> Early Racial Preferences*
> 
> We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. *Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their support and their policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.*
> 
> White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. *The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white*, under Homestead Act provisions.
> 
> *The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not others.* Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land. Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.
> 
> *In the South, the federal government never followed through on General Sherman's Civil War plan to divide up plantations and give each freed slave "40 acres and a mule" as reparations. Only once was monetary compensation made for slavery, in Washington, D.C. There, government officials paid up to $300 per slave upon emancipation - not to the slaves, but to local slaveholders* as compensation for loss of property.
> 
> When slavery ended, its legacy lived on not only in the impoverished condition of Black people but in the wealth and prosperity that accrued to white slaveowners and their descendents. *Economists who try to place a dollar value on how much white Americans have profited from 200 years of unpaid slave labor, including interest, begin their estimates at $1 trillion.*
> 
> Jim Crow laws, instituted in the late 19th and early 20th century and not overturned in many states until the 1960s, reserved the best jobs, neighborhoods, schools and hospitals for white people.
> 
> *The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation*
> 
> *The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian.* As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement. They couldn't pass wealth on to their children. Just the opposite. Their children had to support them.
> 
> Like Social Security,* the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites* and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions.
> 
> But it was another racialized New Deal program, the* Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.*
> 
> *Reaping the Rewards of Racial Preference*
> 
> *One result of the generations of preferential treatment for whites is that a typical white family today has on average eight times the assets, or net worth, of a typical African American family, according to economist Edward Wolff. Even when families of the same income are compared, white families have more than twice the wealth of Black families.* Much of that wealth difference can be attributed to the value of one's home, and how much one inherited from parents.
> 
> But a family's net worth is not simply the finish line, it's also the starting point for the next generation. Those with wealth pass their assets on to their children - by financing a college education, lending a hand during hard times, or assisting with the down payment for a home. Some economists estimate that up to 80 percent of lifetime wealth accumulation depends on these intergenerational transfers. White advantage is passed down, from parent to child to grand-child. As a result, the racial wealth gap - and the head start enjoyed by whites - appears to have grown since the civil rights days.
> 
> *In 1865, just after Emancipation, it is not surprising that African Americans owned 0.5 percent of the total worth of the United States. But by 1990, a full 135 years after the abolition of slavery, Black Americans still possessed only a meager 1 percent of national wealth.*
> 
> Rather than recognize how "racial preferences" have tilted the playing field and given us a head start in life, many whites continue to believe that race does not affect our lives. Instead, we chastise others for not achieving what we have; we even invert the situation and accuse non-whites of using "the race card" to advance themselves.
> 
> RACE - The Power of an Illusion | White Advantage
> 
> *Over 300 years of white AA and government handouts. And those of you here today have benefitted from many of the more recent forms. We paid income taxes also but our money went to pay for whites to get those government home loans or other programs we were denied.  It's time whites faced the damn truth. What you don't believe is not truth. What you don't think should happen isn't the truth. We paid into a system that only you benefitted from. For that alone we are owed.*


You did not, nor anyone else pay taxes for me to get a home loan.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> And what does my citizenship have to do with paying people back that have been dead for generations when i had nothing to do with it?
> Doesnt seem logical. It also seems tyrannical.
> Are you a tyrant?
> 
> 
> 
> Because like I said its a debt the US owes for allowing chattel slavery to exist. Thats extremely logical. What part of my answer confused you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
Click to expand...

I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.


----------



## Coyote

gallantwarrior said:


> Truth is, reparations were already provided for freed slaves immediately following the conclusion of the Civil War.  A large swath of real estate was confiscated from Southern landowners and earmarked for distribution to any freed slave who applied for a designated portion thereof.  The apportioned land, and subsequent mule, was intended for the freed slave to establish himself and provide for his family.  So, the opportunity for economic stability was available.  Since the original freed slaves were already provided opportunity to claim some portion of real property "provided" by those assumed to have owned slaves, there is no need to pay descendants of slaves any amount of money, regardless of source.
> 
> _"Today, we commonly use the phrase "40 acres and a mule," but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: "The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States."
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: " … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such."
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: " … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title."
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — "a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John's River in Florida, including Georgia's Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast," as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves. The extent of this Order and its larger implications are mind-boggling, actually."
> https://www.theroot.com/the-truth-behind-40-acres-and-a-mule-1790894780_


The one problem with that is in reality very few got the acres and mules in the end.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> *That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How would it do that?  You are talking about reparations paid to individuals right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. Money paid to individuals is still counted as wealth.  If most Black people are millionaires the wealth gap goes away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
Click to expand...

What makes you think it would be reinvested into


Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> But only ancestors enslaved in the US?
> So, only those identifying as black and able to provide at least 15%-20% black DNA, and able to prove ancestors having been enslaved (in the US) would qualify for reparations payments.  That all seems fair enough.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
Click to expand...


So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?

In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> *That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How would it do that?  You are talking about reparations paid to individuals right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. Money paid to individuals is still counted as wealth.  If most Black people are millionaires the wealth gap goes away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats correct. Since the US is the one paying it makes zero sense to try and add other countries to the mix.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
Click to expand...

Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.

Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because like I said its a debt the US owes for allowing chattel slavery to exist. Thats extremely logical. What part of my answer confused you?
> 
> 
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
Click to expand...

I do think descendants are owed which is exactly what reparations is about. The monetary value that should have been awarded to their ancestors never was awarded. Therefore they were unable to pay for a better life for their children/descendants.  Plenty of things are a can of worms. That doesnt mean you dont address and solve it. Kicking the can of worms down the road is only going cause more problems. What is the cost of racial animosity?  What is that animosity costing the US?  The US should pay the debt. Its the only meaningful action available and curiously the same action whites are unanimously against. Whites dont honestly want peace, equality, and justice. They want to be comfortably ahead in the game where their ancestors granted them a 3 century head start.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> How would it do that?  You are talking about reparations paid to individuals right?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Money paid to individuals is still counted as wealth.  If most Black people are millionaires the wealth gap goes away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
Click to expand...


There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course. 

Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?

Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.

There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> How would it do that?  You are talking about reparations paid to individuals right?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Money paid to individuals is still counted as wealth.  If most Black people are millionaires the wealth gap goes away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay!  We agree again!
> Now, in all fairness, why should every single taxpayer, regardless of race, gender, or other determining characteristic,  be required to pay into this fund?  The federal government did not hold slaves, per se.  Individuals resident in various states composing the federation held slaves.  Different factions representing various states in the federal structure supported and opposed slavery.
> My proposal would be that all persons who can be proved to have ancestors who held slaves in this country should be required to pay into the reparations fund proportionate to the number of slaves they owned during the period prior to emancipation.  This fund should be then equally divided among those claiming legitimate right to make said claim.
> You identified a fair definition of those who can claim reparations.  I have defined a fair definition of those who should be required to pay into the fund used to pay those reparations.  The remaining element is to identify the data to be used to determine the amount to be paid.  Current rates and benefits, or rates and benefits considered for non-slaves at the time those enslaved were laboring?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
Click to expand...

Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Money paid to individuals is still counted as wealth.  If most Black people are millionaires the wealth gap goes away.
> 
> 
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
Click to expand...

I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.

No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.

Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because like I said its a debt the US owes for allowing chattel slavery to exist. Thats extremely logical. What part of my answer confused you?
> 
> 
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
Click to expand...


So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.

Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Money paid to individuals is still counted as wealth.  If most Black people are millionaires the wealth gap goes away.
> 
> 
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
Click to expand...


Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
Click to expand...

I think you severely underate human nature here.  People are individuals first.  That is why communism was such a flop, it ignored the "what is in it for me" aspect.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think you severely underate human nature here.  People are individuals first.  That is why communism was such a flop, it ignored the "what is in it for me" aspect.
Click to expand...

No. People (at least Black people) are by nature social animals. They go crazy without human companionship.  Thats why solitary confinement is used as a punishment.  Like I was saying. Its not like we are guessing about this. We have proof because we did it in the past.

https://www.theroot.com/the-other-black-wall-streets-1823010812


Communism was massively successful. Its the basis of the first civilizations.  Without it the human species would not have survived.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think you severely underate human nature here.  People are individuals first.  That is why communism was such a flop, it ignored the "what is in it for me" aspect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No. People (at least Black people) are by nature social animals. They go crazy without human companionship.  Thats why solitary confinement is used as a punishment.  Like I was saying. Its not like we are guessing about this. We have proof because we did it in the past.
> 
> https://www.theroot.com/the-other-black-wall-streets-1823010812
> 
> 
> Communism was massively successful. Its the basis of the first civilizations.  Without it humans would not have survived.
Click to expand...

I dont think black people are sny different then white people in that respect.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Money paid to individuals is still counted as wealth.  If most Black people are millionaires the wealth gap goes away.
> 
> 
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Primarily because the US federal government allowed chattel slavery to legally exist in direct violation of its own declaration that every man was entitled to liberty. You brought up an excellent suggestion regarding forcing the families that owned slaves to contribute but to me that would be a separate issue and not nearly enough to actually realize the amount of money we are talking here.  It would just remain a debt owed and never be paid simply because they cant afford it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
Click to expand...


And why are you so concerned with what blacks do with the money? Whites here need to stop thinking they are experts on blacks. Just because whites do things a certain way doesn't mean everybody else will. A is right about the fact reparations have been discussed extensively and for years in the black communiy. John Conyers bought it up in 1989 before congress and the idea had been discussed long before that. In fact King was talking abut this before he was killed when he made refence to the government having to do something economically for blacks.


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
> 
> 
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
Click to expand...

i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The US owes" them over 150 years ago. Not now.
> I am sure that would violate all statutes of limitations on the planet.
> 
> 
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
Click to expand...

Cobel v Salazar os not reparations.  It has to do with mismanagement of trust assets.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> 
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
Click to expand...


When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And why are you so concerned with what blacks do with the money? Whites here need to stop thinking they are experts on blacks. Just because whites do things a certain way doesn't mean everybody else will. A is right about the fact reparations have been discussed extensively and for years in the black communiy. John Conyers bought it up in 1989 before congress and the idea had been discussed long before that. In fact King was talking abut this before he was killed when he made refence to the government having to do something economically for blacks.
Click to expand...

I dont care what they do with the money.  I am just disputing the claim that it will automatically go to improving black communitees.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> 
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think you severely underate human nature here.  People are individuals first.  That is why communism was such a flop, it ignored the "what is in it for me" aspect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No. People (at least Black people) are by nature social animals. They go crazy without human companionship.  Thats why solitary confinement is used as a punishment.  Like I was saying. Its not like we are guessing about this. We have proof because we did it in the past.
> 
> https://www.theroot.com/the-other-black-wall-streets-1823010812
> 
> 
> Communism was massively successful. Its the basis of the first civilizations.  Without it humans would not have survived.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont think black people are sny different then white people in that respect.
Click to expand...

I dont know about that one. I can only go on what their actions are.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And why are you so concerned with what blacks do with the money? Whites here need to stop thinking they are experts on blacks. Just because whites do things a certain way doesn't mean everybody else will. A is right about the fact reparations have been discussed extensively and for years in the black communiy. John Conyers bought it up in 1989 before congress and the idea had been discussed long before that. In fact King was talking abut this before he was killed when he made refence to the government having to do something economically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont care what they do with the money.  I am just disputing the claim that it will automatically go to improving black communitees.
Click to expand...

What makes you think you know enough about the Black community to believe your dispute is valid?  Like I mentioned before this has been discussed extensively and there are about a million examples of it.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> That doesnt even make sense. Time doesnt nullify the debt.
> 
> 
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cobel v Salazar os not reparations.  It has to do with mismanagement of trust assets.
Click to expand...


It was reparations.

Definition of reparation
1 a *: *a repairing or keeping in repair
b reparations plural *: *repairs
2 a *: *the act of making amends, offering expiation, or giving satisfaction for a wrong or injury
b *: *something done or given as amends or satisfaction
3 *: *the payment of damages *: *indemnification; specifically *: *compensation in money or materials payable by a defeated nation for damages to or expenditures sustained by another nation as a result of hostilities with the defeated nation —usually used in plural


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> If i die, are my kids forced to pay for my debts? Of course not. It comes out of my estate.
> How many slave holding descendents still control the original estate? I wouldnt think it is many.
> So why should this be different? Basically, you just want special rights.
> 
> 
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
Click to expand...

when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.  

When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.

So what human rights violations jave I committed?


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
Click to expand...

I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.

No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.

As far as I know you havent committed any.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And why are you so concerned with what blacks do with the money? Whites here need to stop thinking they are experts on blacks. Just because whites do things a certain way doesn't mean everybody else will. A is right about the fact reparations have been discussed extensively and for years in the black communiy. John Conyers bought it up in 1989 before congress and the idea had been discussed long before that. In fact King was talking abut this before he was killed when he made refence to the government having to do something economically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont care what they do with the money.  I am just disputing the claim that it will automatically go to improving black communitees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think you know enough about the Black community to believe your dispute is valid?  Like I mentioned before this has been discussed extensively and there are about a million examples of it.
Click to expand...

I am not speaking on the black community but on human nature. 

Isnt it a pretty big assumption to assume all blacks will think and act the same solely based on skin color? 

It is one thing to say you will do something and another to carry it out money in hand.  People have individual and family priorities.  I dont see whites as a monocultural group with race as their most important concern , are blacks that different?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
Click to expand...

You want to know why it’s more difficult for a Black professional to get hired as opposed to any other race?
Because business owners know your attitude.
They don’t want to get sued by you.
There are people on this forum who read your posts and they wouldn’t even want you as a customer.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
Click to expand...

I am against reparations to anyone not directly a victim of government policy.  Reparations were made to surviving interned Japanese Americans for example.  Not their descendents.


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
> 
> 
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You want to know why it’s more difficult for a Black professional to get hired as opposed to any other race?
> Because business owners know your attitude.
> They don’t want to get sued by you.
> There are people on this forum who read your posts and they wouldn’t even want you as a customer.
Click to expand...

I think his posts are well thought out, he makes good points. I just dont agree.

Not sure what your post has to do with the topic Indee...you seem intent on provocation.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And why are you so concerned with what blacks do with the money? Whites here need to stop thinking they are experts on blacks. Just because whites do things a certain way doesn't mean everybody else will. A is right about the fact reparations have been discussed extensively and for years in the black communiy. John Conyers bought it up in 1989 before congress and the idea had been discussed long before that. In fact King was talking abut this before he was killed when he made refence to the government having to do something economically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont care what they do with the money.  I am just disputing the claim that it will automatically go to improving black communitees.
Click to expand...


Yeah and how many black community, national or international  meetings have you sat in discussing reparations and community development? I've sat in hundreds. I'm sure A has done the same. So for you to dispute what you appear to have no idea of makes little sense.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> 
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And why are you so concerned with what blacks do with the money? Whites here need to stop thinking they are experts on blacks. Just because whites do things a certain way doesn't mean everybody else will. A is right about the fact reparations have been discussed extensively and for years in the black communiy. John Conyers bought it up in 1989 before congress and the idea had been discussed long before that. In fact King was talking abut this before he was killed when he made refence to the government having to do something economically for blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont care what they do with the money.  I am just disputing the claim that it will automatically go to improving black communitees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think you know enough about the Black community to believe your dispute is valid?  Like I mentioned before this has been discussed extensively and there are about a million examples of it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am not speaking on the black community but on human nature.
> 
> Isnt it a pretty big assumption to assume all blacks will think and act the same solely based on skin color?
> 
> It is one thing to say you will do something and another to carry it out money in hand.  People have individual and family priorities.  I dont see whites as a monocultural group with race as their most important concern , are blacks that different?
Click to expand...

I disagree. Youre obviously speaking about the Black community. That was your question. Your rationale for the question was human nature.

Yes its a pretty big assumption and one of the reasons I never said all Black people would be on board with it. I dont think for a minute any sell outs or race traitors will be down for it. I do know the vast majority of Blacks are in agreement about bettering our communities.

Well like I said...we have examples of us doing just that.  We form organizations to help each other. We donate money to help each other.  We organize holidays to celebrate together with the theme being Black unity. Yes I think Blacks are that different. Especially when they are not poisoned by current white philosophy and they have a firm understanding of what makes us Black people who we are and why we are so strong.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You want to know why it’s more difficult for a Black professional to get hired as opposed to any other race?
> Because business owners know your attitude.
> They don’t want to get sued by you.
> There are people on this forum who read your posts and they wouldn’t even want you as a customer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think his posts are well thought out, he makes good points. I just dont agree.
> 
> Not sure what your post has to do with the topic Indee...you seem intent on provocation.
Click to expand...

I worked on Wall Street when Reagan become president.
Patrick Moynahan, at the behest of Reagan, eliminated the NYC Race Quota requiring businesses to hire based on Race within a certain proximity of NYC.
It was akin to Affirmative Action.
Reagan wanted to expand Business Visas from Japan and China and thus told Moynahan to reduce Blacks and Hispanics from the workforce.
They both knew that eventually minorities would be marching in the streets over being fired en masse and there wad no Internet to spread the word.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
> 
> 
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am against reparations to anyone not directly a victim of government policy.  Reparations were made to surviving interned Japanese Americans for example.  Not their descendents.
Click to expand...

Not true. Some Japanese descendants did get reparations.  I know 1 personally.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
> 
> 
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You want to know why it’s more difficult for a Black professional to get hired as opposed to any other race?
> Because business owners know your attitude.
> They don’t want to get sued by you.
> There are people on this forum who read your posts and they wouldn’t even want you as a customer.
Click to expand...

I have no problems getting hired. People hunt me down for my skills.  
I dont care about white people not wanting me as a customer. I prefer to spend my money with Black businesses. Sorry


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You want to know why it’s more difficult for a Black professional to get hired as opposed to any other race?
> Because business owners know your attitude.
> They don’t want to get sued by you.
> There are people on this forum who read your posts and they wouldn’t even want you as a customer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have no problems getting hired. People hunt me down for my skills.
> I dont care about white people not wanting me as a customer. I prefer to spend my money with Black businesses. Sorry
Click to expand...

Excellent!
Do you support a police presence to ensure a safe community for schools and businesses?
Because without a police presence many areas are not very appealing.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

620,000 died to put an end to slavery, any debts are settled, and then some.


----------



## Indeependent

One question on my mind is how life would have been for African Americans if their families did not sell them to Dutch traders?
Would they still be in Africa begging American and European investors for money?
Because Africa sure isn’t developing from internal resources.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> 620,000 died to end slavery, any debts are settled, and then some.


No one died to end slavery. If youre referring to the civil war....it was fought to keep the southern losers from leaving..

*“if I could save the union without freeing any slave I would do it”*
-Abe Lincoln

Lincoln had no choice but to free the slaves in the south or the Union would have lost the war.  We know this because the northern enslaved were still slaves.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
> 
> 
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You want to know why it’s more difficult for a Black professional to get hired as opposed to any other race?
> Because business owners know your attitude.
> They don’t want to get sued by you.
> There are people on this forum who read your posts and they wouldn’t even want you as a customer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have no problems getting hired. People hunt me down for my skills.
> I dont care about white people not wanting me as a customer. I prefer to spend my money with Black businesses. Sorry
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Excellent!
> Do you support a police presence to ensure a safe community for schools and businesses?
> Because without a police presence many areas are not very appealing.
Click to expand...

Not really on topic. Why are you deflecting?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You want to know why it’s more difficult for a Black professional to get hired as opposed to any other race?
> Because business owners know your attitude.
> They don’t want to get sued by you.
> There are people on this forum who read your posts and they wouldn’t even want you as a customer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have no problems getting hired. People hunt me down for my skills.
> I dont care about white people not wanting me as a customer. I prefer to spend my money with Black businesses. Sorry
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Excellent!
> Do you support a police presence to ensure a safe community for schools and businesses?
> Because without a police presence many areas are not very appealing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really on topic. Why are you deflecting?
Click to expand...

A tangent on the topic, perhaps.
I would hope you would use reparations to improve communities.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You want to know why it’s more difficult for a Black professional to get hired as opposed to any other race?
> Because business owners know your attitude.
> They don’t want to get sued by you.
> There are people on this forum who read your posts and they wouldn’t even want you as a customer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have no problems getting hired. People hunt me down for my skills.
> I dont care about white people not wanting me as a customer. I prefer to spend my money with Black businesses. Sorry
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Excellent!
> Do you support a police presence to ensure a safe community for schools and businesses?
> Because without a police presence many areas are not very appealing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really on topic. Why are you deflecting?
Click to expand...

In reality, the topic is exhausted.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. Whites own the government hence why reparations have not been paid. Its valid to refer to whites as a group when discussing the government.
> 
> No its about the whites that are against reparations. The ones in control of the government. Not all whites are against reparations.
> 
> As far as I know you havent committed any.
> 
> 
> 
> You want to know why it’s more difficult for a Black professional to get hired as opposed to any other race?
> Because business owners know your attitude.
> They don’t want to get sued by you.
> There are people on this forum who read your posts and they wouldn’t even want you as a customer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have no problems getting hired. People hunt me down for my skills.
> I dont care about white people not wanting me as a customer. I prefer to spend my money with Black businesses. Sorry
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Excellent!
> Do you support a police presence to ensure a safe community for schools and businesses?
> Because without a police presence many areas are not very appealing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really on topic. Why are you deflecting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In reality, the topic is exhausted.
Click to expand...

It may be exhausting to you but I am pretty fresh and ready to see any other claims why reparations are not valid. If you cant come up with any valid ones thats your issue.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You want to know why it’s more difficult for a Black professional to get hired as opposed to any other race?
> Because business owners know your attitude.
> They don’t want to get sued by you.
> There are people on this forum who read your posts and they wouldn’t even want you as a customer.
> 
> 
> 
> I have no problems getting hired. People hunt me down for my skills.
> I dont care about white people not wanting me as a customer. I prefer to spend my money with Black businesses. Sorry
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Excellent!
> Do you support a police presence to ensure a safe community for schools and businesses?
> Because without a police presence many areas are not very appealing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really on topic. Why are you deflecting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In reality, the topic is exhausted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It may be exhausting to you but I am pretty fresh and ready to see any other claims why reparations are not valid. If you cant come up with any valid ones thats your issue.
Click to expand...

That’s why you haven’t received them.
Whatever anyone says is dismissable.
You’ll get real far with that attitude.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no problems getting hired. People hunt me down for my skills.
> I dont care about white people not wanting me as a customer. I prefer to spend my money with Black businesses. Sorry
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent!
> Do you support a police presence to ensure a safe community for schools and businesses?
> Because without a police presence many areas are not very appealing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really on topic. Why are you deflecting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In reality, the topic is exhausted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It may be exhausting to you but I am pretty fresh and ready to see any other claims why reparations are not valid. If you cant come up with any valid ones thats your issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s why you haven’t received them.
> Whatever anyone says is dismissable.
> You’ll get real far with that attitude.
Click to expand...


He hates Whitey, it is what it is.


----------



## Indeependent

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent!
> Do you support a police presence to ensure a safe community for schools and businesses?
> Because without a police presence many areas are not very appealing.
> 
> 
> 
> Not really on topic. Why are you deflecting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In reality, the topic is exhausted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It may be exhausting to you but I am pretty fresh and ready to see any other claims why reparations are not valid. If you cant come up with any valid ones thats your issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s why you haven’t received them.
> Whatever anyone says is dismissable.
> You’ll get real far with that attitude.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He hates Whitey, it is what it is.
Click to expand...

Yes he does; he may have his reasons.
I grew up in a very Jew hating community and I don’t hate groups, just individual idiots.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> The US didnt die dummy.  Concentrate. This is a debt the US owed the enslaved and owes the descendants of the enslaved since it was never paid.
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t think descendents are owed anything, they were not the ones against whom the atrocity was committed.  The idea of reparations for descendents of anything is a huge can of worms.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the descendants of the Native Americans awarded 3.2 billion in Cobell v. Salazar a couple of years ago for what happened because of the Dawes Act didn't deserve reparations.
> 
> Let me make this short and sweet. White folks opinion is not the law. There is no statute of limitations oh human tights violations.. So what you whites here think, you can think it, but legally we can take a case to court for slavery reparations and as descendants  of slaves we can receive reparations. However since you whites want to keep talking stupid, we can take a case to curt for human rights violations against blacks that covers the entirety of US history naming numerous violations whereby those like you cannot argue about how we aren't eligible for reparations.  So as we keep beating this dead horse because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations, you might want to rethink your argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i have not commited any crime inless you trying to claim that being white is a crime.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you learn this is about the government and not abut you the conversation will get better.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> when you talk about "you whites" you take it out of the realm of government and into personal.
> 
> When you state "because whites do not want to be penalized for committing continuing human rights violations" you make it anout anyone white.
> 
> So what human rights violations jave I committed?
Click to expand...


This is about the whites here not everyone white. It's time you whites here stopped that shit. You create unnecessary anger and derail conversation because of this. You whites are the ones here talking. And we have explained how this is a case to be taken to the government. And we still are reading about what you whites don't want to pay. If the payments are made for human rights violations, which is what slavery was, and if you oppose reparations for additional continuing human rights violations by whites as a white person, then you oppose having to pay a penalty for human rights violations committed by whites whether or not you committed one or not. Clear enough for you?


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> 620,000 died to put an end to slavery, any debts are settled, and then some.



Incorrect.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no problems getting hired. People hunt me down for my skills.
> I dont care about white people not wanting me as a customer. I prefer to spend my money with Black businesses. Sorry
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent!
> Do you support a police presence to ensure a safe community for schools and businesses?
> Because without a police presence many areas are not very appealing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really on topic. Why are you deflecting?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In reality, the topic is exhausted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It may be exhausting to you but I am pretty fresh and ready to see any other claims why reparations are not valid. If you cant come up with any valid ones thats your issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s why you haven’t received them.
> Whatever anyone says is dismissable.
> You’ll get real far with that attitude.
Click to expand...

I dont plan on receiving them. Just making the point that your excuses are weak bread and based on whites not wanting to give up their head start. 

 Yes your excuses are easily dismissable because they are not based in reality.  Thats one of the reasons you whites like to deflect from the point. You dont have anything valid to offer.

I know. I have gotten pretty far coming from the hood to where I am now.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> One question on my mind is how life would have been for African Americans if their families did not sell them to Dutch traders?
> Would they still be in Africa begging American and European investors for money?
> Because Africa sure isn’t developing from internal resources.



This is pure ignorance that has no basis in fact.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Indeependent said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not really on topic. Why are you deflecting?
> 
> 
> 
> In reality, the topic is exhausted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It may be exhausting to you but I am pretty fresh and ready to see any other claims why reparations are not valid. If you cant come up with any valid ones thats your issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s why you haven’t received them.
> Whatever anyone says is dismissable.
> You’ll get real far with that attitude.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He hates Whitey, it is what it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes he does; he may have his reasons.
> I grew up in a very Jew hating community and I don’t hate groups, just individual idiots.
Click to expand...


Agreed.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> One question on my mind is how life would have been for African Americans if their families did not sell them to Dutch traders?
> Would they still be in Africa begging American and European investors for money?
> Because Africa sure isn’t developing from internal resources.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is pure ignorance that has no basis in fact.
Click to expand...

Sure.
That’s why every entertainment contest show on TV has their “Giving Back” episode dedicated to the poor of the African Continent.
It’s not like their audience is Black.
Africa is a great investment for cheap labor; just like India and China.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
Click to expand...


I realize that slavery was one of, if not the, most horrible wrongs committed by the US as a nation.  I was just trying to point out that everyone likely has ancestors who committed atrocities.  It was a bit of a tongue-in-cheek comment.  

Should reparations be based on those directly wronged, or on the descendants?  In other words, when calculating amounts, would it be the amount that should have been paid to slaves, and then that amount gets split up between eligible recipients, or should each recipient get whatever would have been owed to each slave?

I don't see how a lack of time limit is inherent in the idea of reparations.  I also think that, at some point, you get to a place where reparations become pointless: if I have an ancestor that owned slaves in ancient Egypt, for example, it wouldn't make sense for me to pay reparations to the descendant of a slave owned by that ancestor of mine.  I'm not saying that applies to slavery in the US, I'm just wondering if you believe there is a point where reparations are not longer actually redressing a wrong.

How is the problem going to get worse and larger with time?  

Whether or not there is even a financial debt is a contentious issue.

I thought it was the US that owed the debt?  Now here you are, saying the debt is owed by whites.  It certainly does not lend you any credence to argue that the country owes a debt when you follow that up by saying that it is whites that owe the debt.

I don't expect an official count, I just wonder why you feel comfortable speaking for so many people.  Finding anything like a consensus among 40-50 million people can be a difficult thing IMO.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> One question on my mind is how life would have been for African Americans if their families did not sell them to Dutch traders?
> Would they still be in Africa begging American and European investors for money?
> Because Africa sure isn’t developing from internal resources.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is pure ignorance that has no basis in fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure.
> That’s why every entertainment contest show on TV has their “Giving Back” episode dedicated to the poor of the African Continent.
> It’s not like their audience is Black.
> Africa is a great investment for cheap labor; just like India and China.
Click to expand...


Your comments continue to show a complete lack of knowledge.


----------



## IM2

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.



What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
Click to expand...


We are talking about  human rights violations. Understand?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> One question on my mind is how life would have been for African Americans if their families did not sell them to Dutch traders?
> Would they still be in Africa begging American and European investors for money?
> Because Africa sure isn’t developing from internal resources.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is pure ignorance that has no basis in fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure.
> That’s why every entertainment contest show on TV has their “Giving Back” episode dedicated to the poor of the African Continent.
> It’s not like their audience is Black.
> Africa is a great investment for cheap labor; just like India and China.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your comments continue to show a complete lack of knowledge.
Click to expand...

Really?
Do the calculations of starving African familes with no hope of their kids having a better future in Africa and they’re brought to a place to work just as hard as they would on the farms in Africa.
Add to that the cost of clothing and food back then would just about cover their abject poverty back home.
From an accounting point of view, all you have left is the value of one’s personal time.
How productive was/is personal time in the typical African village?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are talking about  human rights violations. Understand?
Click to expand...

In Africa?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.


What determines law?


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are talking about  human rights violations. Understand?
Click to expand...


That's not US law regarding reparations.  I'm asking what specific laws govern the authorization, calculation, and distribution of reparations for slavery.  You made the statement that the law, not what people think, determines what matters in this case.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
Click to expand...


Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.

We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I realize that slavery was one of, if not the, most horrible wrongs committed by the US as a nation.  I was just trying to point out that everyone likely has ancestors who committed atrocities.  It was a bit of a tongue-in-cheek comment.
> 
> Should reparations be based on those directly wronged, or on the descendants?  In other words, when calculating amounts, would it be the amount that should have been paid to slaves, and then that amount gets split up between eligible recipients, or should each recipient get whatever would have been owed to each slave?
> 
> I don't see how a lack of time limit is inherent in the idea of reparations.  I also think that, at some point, you get to a place where reparations become pointless: if I have an ancestor that owned slaves in ancient Egypt, for example, it wouldn't make sense for me to pay reparations to the descendant of a slave owned by that ancestor of mine.  I'm not saying that applies to slavery in the US, I'm just wondering if you believe there is a point where reparations are not longer actually redressing a wrong.
> 
> How is the problem going to get worse and larger with time?
> 
> Whether or not there is even a financial debt is a contentious issue.
> 
> I thought it was the US that owed the debt?  Now here you are, saying the debt is owed by whites.  It certainly does not lend you any credence to argue that the country owes a debt when you follow that up by saying that it is whites that owe the debt.
> 
> I don't expect an official count, I just wonder why you feel comfortable speaking for so many people.  Finding anything like a consensus among 40-50 million people can be a difficult thing IMO.
Click to expand...

Your question doesnt make sense. The people that were directly wronged were the enslaved and they were never compensated period.  Since they were unable to use that compensation to assist their descendants the money should go to their descendants with interest.  The compensation should include lost wages and punitive damages. again with interest accumulating from the time the enslaved were freed.

Reparations is never pointless. The entire concept is one of rectifying what occurred in the past. I'd have to reject your thoughts about it being pointless out of hand.

The more time that goes by the more Black people are going to need to be paid.

I dont know where you go that belief. Reparations is all about finance.

Yes the US owes the debts. Whites dont want it to be paid. They are the main group that doesnt want to pay the debt. I dont know where you got it was only white folks debt since other races pay taxes as well..

I feel comfortable speaking for so many people because I'm Black and have had these discussions with other Blacks too many times to count.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
Click to expand...

That would be based on precedent. The precedent has been set that reparations are due.  There are too many examples of it. Whites cant change it just because they dont want to pay Blacks reparations for slavery.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
Click to expand...

I do agree that Blacks should never have been considered chattel.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That would be based on precedent. The precedent has been set that reparations are due.  There are too many examples of it. Whites cant change it just because they dont want to pay Blacks reparations for slavery.
Click to expand...

Are the examples on the Internet?


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That would be based on precedent. The precedent has been set that reparations are due.  There are too many examples of it. Whites cant change it just because they dont want to pay Blacks reparations for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are the examples on the Internet?
Click to expand...

Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
Click to expand...


So, in what year were your human rights violated?


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, in what year were you human rights violated?
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with topic?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That would be based on precedent. The precedent has been set that reparations are due.  There are too many examples of it. Whites cant change it just because they dont want to pay Blacks reparations for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are the examples on the Internet?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"
Click to expand...

Precedents concern land theft.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are talking about  human rights violations. Understand?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's not US law regarding reparations.  I'm asking what specific laws govern the authorization, calculation, and distribution of reparations for slavery.  You made the statement that the law, not what people think, determines what matters in this case.
Click to expand...


Yep I did. Since reparations would be asked for those human rights violations and will be determined by proving of such, then we are talking about human rights violations.  We are talking about a settlement.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, in what year were you human rights violated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with topic?
Click to expand...


Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:

"We are talking about human rights violations."


----------



## Indeependent

Theft of land and displacement of US citizens.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That would be based on precedent. The precedent has been set that reparations are due.  There are too many examples of it. Whites cant change it just because they dont want to pay Blacks reparations for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are the examples on the Internet?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Precedents concern land theft.
Click to expand...

Show us in the definition of "precedent" where it only applies to land theft.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are talking about  human rights violations. Understand?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's not US law regarding reparations.  I'm asking what specific laws govern the authorization, calculation, and distribution of reparations for slavery.  You made the statement that the law, not what people think, determines what matters in this case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep I did. Since reparations would be asked for those human rights violations and will be determined by proving of such, then we are talking about human rights violations.  We are talking about a settlement.
Click to expand...


To be awarded damages, you have to prove _you _were damaged.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> That would be based on precedent. The precedent has been set that reparations are due.  There are too many examples of it. Whites cant change it just because they dont want to pay Blacks reparations for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are the examples on the Internet?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Precedents concern land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show us in the definition of precedent where it only applies to land theft.
Click to expand...

Did you bother reading the cases?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> That would be based on precedent. The precedent has been set that reparations are due.  There are too many examples of it. Whites cant change it just because they dont want to pay Blacks reparations for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are the examples on the Internet?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Precedents concern land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show us in the definition of "precedent" where it only applies to land theft.
Click to expand...


Are you now claiming you had  your land stolen?


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, in what year were you human rights violated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
Click to expand...

No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?


----------



## Indeependent

And there aren’t that many cases.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> That would be based on precedent. The precedent has been set that reparations are due.  There are too many examples of it. Whites cant change it just because they dont want to pay Blacks reparations for slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> Are the examples on the Internet?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Precedents concern land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show us in the definition of precedent where it only applies to land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you bother reading the cases?
Click to expand...

Did you bother reading the dictionary?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, in what year were you human rights violated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
Click to expand...

There’s no precedent yet for slavery.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> That would be based on precedent. The precedent has been set that reparations are due.  There are too many examples of it. Whites cant change it just because they dont want to pay Blacks reparations for slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> Are the examples on the Internet?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Precedents concern land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show us in the definition of "precedent" where it only applies to land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you now claiming you had  your land stolen?
Click to expand...

Where did you see me make any claim regarding stolen land?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are the examples on the Internet?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Precedents concern land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show us in the definition of precedent where it only applies to land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you bother reading the cases?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you bother reading the dictionary?
Click to expand...

Ad hominem.
Have you ever had a conversation with an attorney.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, in what year were you human rights violated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
Click to expand...

There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, in what year were your human rights violated?
Click to expand...


Another stupid pointless question.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"
> 
> 
> 
> Precedents concern land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Show us in the definition of precedent where it only applies to land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you bother reading the cases?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you bother reading the dictionary?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ad hominem.
> Have you ever had a conversation with an attorney.
Click to expand...

Ad hominem.
Have you ever had a conversation with with a dictionary?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, in what year were you human rights violated?
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
Click to expand...

Based on?
You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
Precedent based on what wrong?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, in what year were you human rights violated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
Click to expand...


Nope, sure enough.. it was IM2.  My bad.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with topic?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
Click to expand...

Based on reparations.
If you say so.
slavery.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Precedents concern land theft.
> 
> 
> 
> Show us in the definition of precedent where it only applies to land theft.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you bother reading the cases?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you bother reading the dictionary?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ad hominem.
> Have you ever had a conversation with an attorney.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ad hominem.
> Have you ever had a conversation with with a dictionary?
Click to expand...

For such a successful business person you seem to have a poor grasp of legal concepts.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> 
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on reparations.
> If you say so.
> slavery.
Click to expand...

No precedent exists.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show us in the definition of precedent where it only applies to land theft.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bother reading the cases?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you bother reading the dictionary?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ad hominem.
> Have you ever had a conversation with an attorney.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ad hominem.
> Have you ever had a conversation with with a dictionary?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For such a successful business person you seem to have a poor grasp of legal concepts.
Click to expand...

It only seems like that because youre white and easily confused.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> 
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on reparations.
> If you say so.
> slavery.
Click to expand...

There’s no precedent for Reparations based on Slavery of a non-US citizen.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> 
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on reparations.
> If you say so.
> slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No precedent exists.
Click to expand...

Of course it does. I even told you how to look it up.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, in what year were your human rights violated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another stupid pointless question.
Click to expand...


IM2's asserted that this about human rights violations.  I asked when were his rights violated.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, in what year were your human rights violated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another stupid pointless question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> IM2's asserted that this about human rights violations.  I asked when were his rights violated.
Click to expand...

Why would you ask such an irrelevant question?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on reparations.
> If you say so.
> slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No precedent exists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it does. I even told you how to look it up.
Click to expand...

I did and I posted the basis of the precedents.
You would have to create a new precedent.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, in what year were your human rights violated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another stupid pointless question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> IM2's asserted that this about human rights violations.  I asked when were his rights violated.
Click to expand...


And that was a dumb pointless question.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with topic?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
Click to expand...


Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> What determines law?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here we go with the stupid white game of 20 questions.
> 
> We are talking about human rights violations. Committed by whites against blacks. Sanctioned by US government law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, in what year were your human rights violated?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another stupid pointless question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> IM2's asserted that this about human rights violations.  I asked when were his rights violated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that was a dumb pointless question.
Click to expand...


Only to a stupid and pointless person.


----------



## Indeependent

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> 
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
Click to expand...

They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> 
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
Click to expand...

Thats a logical fallacy called false equivalence. You whites are exceptional at logical fallacies.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on reparations.
> If you say so.
> slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No precedent exists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it does. I even told you how to look it up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I did and I posted the basis of the precedents.
> You would have to create a new precedent.
Click to expand...

No you just claimed there was no precedent. I corrected you.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Indeependent said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> 
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
Click to expand...


They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> Based on reparations.
> If you say so.
> slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No precedent exists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it does. I even told you how to look it up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I did and I posted the basis of the precedents.
> You would have to create a new precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No you just claimed there was no precedent. I corrected you.
Click to expand...

You got pissed which amounts to zero to an attorney.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
Click to expand...

We can prove our ancestors were damaged and we can prove that damage affected us.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

I wonder if this guy is entitled to a check?


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Based on reparations.
> If you say so.
> slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> No precedent exists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it does. I even told you how to look it up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I did and I posted the basis of the precedents.
> You would have to create a new precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No you just claimed there was no precedent. I corrected you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You got pissed which amounts to zero to an attorney.
Click to expand...

Laughing at your ignorance is not me getting pissed. You claim there is no precedence but there clearly is.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We can prove our ancestors were damaged and we can prove that damage affected us.
Click to expand...


No you can't, that's absurd.


----------



## Indeependent

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
Click to expand...

Every segment of society, at one time or another, was subject to rejection and abject poverty.
They learned a trade.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> No precedent exists.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it does. I even told you how to look it up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I did and I posted the basis of the precedents.
> You would have to create a new precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No you just claimed there was no precedent. I corrected you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You got pissed which amounts to zero to an attorney.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Laughing at your ignorance is not me getting pissed. You claim there is no precedence but there clearly is.
Click to expand...

You are ignorant of the legal process.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We can prove our ancestors were damaged and we can prove that damage affected us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you can't, that's absurd.
Click to expand...

Yes we can. Youre just in denial.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it does. I even told you how to look it up.
> 
> 
> 
> I did and I posted the basis of the precedents.
> You would have to create a new precedent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No you just claimed there was no precedent. I corrected you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You got pissed which amounts to zero to an attorney.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Laughing at your ignorance is not me getting pissed. You claim there is no precedence but there clearly is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are ignorant of the legal process.
Click to expand...

You are ignorant of the legal process and dictionaries.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Indeependent said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every segment of society, at one time or another, was subject to rejection and abject poverty.
> They learned a trade.
Click to expand...


Not to mention, nearly every race on this planet has had its people enslaved by another.  The dirty secret about slavery is that most blacks were captured and sold into slavery, by other blacks.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every segment of society, at one time or another, was subject to rejection and abject poverty.
> They learned a trade.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with slavery?  The enslaved learned trades but didnt get paid for it not to mention the atrocities they had to endure.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I did and I posted the basis of the precedents.
> You would have to create a new precedent.
> 
> 
> 
> No you just claimed there was no precedent. I corrected you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You got pissed which amounts to zero to an attorney.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Laughing at your ignorance is not me getting pissed. You claim there is no precedence but there clearly is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are ignorant of the legal process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are ignorant of the legal process and dictionaries.
Click to expand...

Uh huh.
And you wonder why you’ve gotten no where with this issue.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We can prove our ancestors were damaged and we can prove that damage affected us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you can't, that's absurd.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes we can. Youre just in denial.
Click to expand...


No you can't, stop being ridiculous.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every segment of society, at one time or another, was subject to rejection and abject poverty.
> They learned a trade.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to mention, nearly every race on this planet has had its people enslaved by another.  The dirty secret about slavery is that most blacks were captured and sold into slavery, by other blacks.
Click to expand...

White deflections again. We arent talking about the planet. We are talking about the US.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every segment of society, at one time or another, was subject to rejection and abject poverty.
> They learned a trade.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with slavery?  The enslaved learned trades but didnt get paid for it not to mention the atrocities they had to endure.
Click to expand...

Food, clothes, housing.  Are you stupid?
The issue is slavery, not renumeration.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you just claimed there was no precedent. I corrected you.
> 
> 
> 
> You got pissed which amounts to zero to an attorney.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Laughing at your ignorance is not me getting pissed. You claim there is no precedence but there clearly is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are ignorant of the legal process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are ignorant of the legal process and dictionaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uh huh.
> And you wonder why you’ve gotten no where with this issue.
Click to expand...

No I dont wonder why. I know whites control the legal process and dont want to lose their head start granted to them.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We can prove our ancestors were damaged and we can prove that damage affected us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you can't, that's absurd.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes we can. Youre just in denial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you can't, stop being ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You got pissed which amounts to zero to an attorney.
> 
> 
> 
> Laughing at your ignorance is not me getting pissed. You claim there is no precedence but there clearly is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are ignorant of the legal process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are ignorant of the legal process and dictionaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uh huh.
> And you wonder why you’ve gotten no where with this issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No I dont wonder why. I know whites control the legal process and dont want to lose their head start granted to them.
Click to expand...

I was wondering how *Affirmative Action* became law!


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every segment of society, at one time or another, was subject to rejection and abject poverty.
> They learned a trade.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with slavery?  The enslaved learned trades but didnt get paid for it not to mention the atrocities they had to endure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Food, clothes, housing.  Are you stupid?
> The issue is slavery, not renumeration.
Click to expand...

Youre the only stupid one I see.
The issue is reparations.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Laughing at your ignorance is not me getting pissed. You claim there is no precedence but there clearly is.
> 
> 
> 
> You are ignorant of the legal process.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are ignorant of the legal process and dictionaries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uh huh.
> And you wonder why you’ve gotten no where with this issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No I dont wonder why. I know whites control the legal process and dont want to lose their head start granted to them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I was wondering how *Affirmative Action* became law!
Click to expand...

You'd have to ask the white women that benefited from it the most.  Either way AA is not reparations.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Every segment of society, at one time or another, was subject to rejection and abject poverty.
> They learned a trade.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with slavery?  The enslaved learned trades but didnt get paid for it not to mention the atrocities they had to endure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Food, clothes, housing.  Are you stupid?
> The issue is slavery, not renumeration.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre the only stupid one I see.
> The issue is reparations.
Click to expand...

You f*ing moron, Reparations are the *award* based on...*what*?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> We can prove our ancestors were damaged and we can prove that damage affected us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you can't, that's absurd.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes we can. Youre just in denial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you can't, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.
Click to expand...


Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> Every segment of society, at one time or another, was subject to rejection and abject poverty.
> They learned a trade.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does that have to do with slavery?  The enslaved learned trades but didnt get paid for it not to mention the atrocities they had to endure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Food, clothes, housing.  Are you stupid?
> The issue is slavery, not renumeration.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre the only stupid one I see.
> The issue is reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You f*ing moron, Reparations are the *award* based on...*what*?
Click to expand...

Dont get angry. Get a better argument.

Get a dictionary. It will help you understand what reparations are.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> We can prove our ancestors were damaged and we can prove that damage affected us.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No you can't, that's absurd.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes we can. Youre just in denial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you can't, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.
Click to expand...

Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the need arise.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every segment of society, at one time or another, was subject to rejection and abject poverty.
> They learned a trade.
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with slavery?  The enslaved learned trades but didnt get paid for it not to mention the atrocities they had to endure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Food, clothes, housing.  Are you stupid?
> The issue is slavery, not renumeration.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre the only stupid one I see.
> The issue is reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You f*ing moron, Reparations are the *award* based on...*what*?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dont get angry. Get a better argument.
> 
> Get a dictionary. It will help you understand what reparations are.
Click to expand...

You know nothing about how the legal process works.
This is what happens when you attend too many
Community meetings with others who know nothing.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with slavery?  The enslaved learned trades but didnt get paid for it not to mention the atrocities they had to endure.
> 
> 
> 
> Food, clothes, housing.  Are you stupid?
> The issue is slavery, not renumeration.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre the only stupid one I see.
> The issue is reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You f*ing moron, Reparations are the *award* based on...*what*?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dont get angry. Get a better argument.
> 
> Get a dictionary. It will help you understand what reparations are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You know nothing about how the legal process works.
> This is what happens when you attend too many
> Community meetings with others who know nothing.
Click to expand...

If you say so. Doesnt change the fact that you need to get an education on how to use the dictionary.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you can't, that's absurd.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes we can. Youre just in denial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you can't, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the moment arise.
Click to expand...


You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.

You are one delusional dolt.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes we can. Youre just in denial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No you can't, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the moment arise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
> 
> You are one delusional dolt.
Click to expand...

All Black biblical figures BTW.

Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you can't, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the moment arise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
> 
> You are one delusional dolt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All Black biblical figures BTW.
> 
> Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.
Click to expand...


Yeah right?  And so was Santa Claus.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you can't, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the moment arise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
> 
> You are one delusional dolt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All Black biblical figures BTW.
> 
> Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.
Click to expand...

Actually, you are delusional when it comes to the legal process.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the moment arise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
> 
> You are one delusional dolt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All Black biblical figures BTW.
> 
> Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah right?  And so was Santa Claus.
Click to expand...

Actually he was but lets get back on topic.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you can't, stop being ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the moment arise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
> 
> You are one delusional dolt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All Black biblical figures BTW.
> 
> Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.
Click to expand...


Coming from a guy that claims he is "comfortable" that he can prove something if need be?


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the moment arise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
> 
> You are one delusional dolt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All Black biblical figures BTW.
> 
> Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, you are delusional when it comes to the legal process.
Click to expand...

Says the guy that has no clue what precedent means.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes we can. Stop being an idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the moment arise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
> 
> You are one delusional dolt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All Black biblical figures BTW.
> 
> Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Coming from a guy that claims he is "comfortable" that he can prove something if need be?
Click to expand...

Says the guy that thinks it cant be proven.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whatthefuckever.. if you can, then link to it.
> 
> 
> 
> Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the moment arise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
> 
> You are one delusional dolt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All Black biblical figures BTW.
> 
> Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah right?  And so was Santa Claus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually he was but lets get back on topic.
Click to expand...


Now that's just stupid and I know you don't believe that.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would I link to it? I'm comfortable knowing we can prove it should the moment arise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
> 
> You are one delusional dolt.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All Black biblical figures BTW.
> 
> Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah right?  And so was Santa Claus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually he was but lets get back on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that's just stupid and I know you don't believe that.
Click to expand...

Not my concern what you believe. I just offered the information to you.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're _comfortable?   _Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
> 
> You are one delusional dolt.
> 
> 
> 
> All Black biblical figures BTW.
> 
> Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah right?  And so was Santa Claus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually he was but lets get back on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that's just stupid and I know you don't believe that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not my concern what you believe. I just offered the information to you.
Click to expand...


You offered nonsensical bullshit.


----------



## Indeependent

Soggy...don’t bother.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> All Black biblical figures BTW.
> 
> Yes. I'm comfortable. Confident people typically are comfortable..Thats why I dont grant your babble any significance.  Only a retard would make the claim you did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah right?  And so was Santa Claus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually he was but lets get back on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that's just stupid and I know you don't believe that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not my concern what you believe. I just offered the information to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You offered nonsensical bullshit.
Click to expand...

Thats your brainwashing talking.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah right?  And so was Santa Claus.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he was but lets get back on topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that's just stupid and I know you don't believe that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not my concern what you believe. I just offered the information to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You offered nonsensical bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats your brainwashing talking.
Click to expand...

Let us know the court date.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he was but lets get back on topic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that's just stupid and I know you don't believe that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not my concern what you believe. I just offered the information to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You offered nonsensical bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats your brainwashing talking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let us know the court date.
Click to expand...


Don't waste your time.. he's now claiming that everyone from Jesus to Santa Claus was black.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually he was but lets get back on topic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that's just stupid and I know you don't believe that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not my concern what you believe. I just offered the information to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You offered nonsensical bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats your brainwashing talking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let us know the court date.
Click to expand...

Dont hold your breath. It probably wont be in your or my lifetime. White people control the legal system and they hate paying their debts.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now that's just stupid and I know you don't believe that.
> 
> 
> 
> Not my concern what you believe. I just offered the information to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You offered nonsensical bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats your brainwashing talking.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let us know the court date.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't waste your time.. he's now claiming that everyone from Jesus to Santa Claus were black.
Click to expand...

They are Black but its really not the point. Just information you can use so you dont appear to be so ignorant.


----------



## MisterBeale

_"We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives, that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate—we cannot hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."_


Men have already paid the full price of the nation's sins.  To make others pay for sins which are not theirs is wholly unjust.

We must not forget, nor should we make others pay for those sins that it should cause further enmity and recriminations through history.

_With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan—to do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations._


----------



## Asclepias

MisterBeale said:


> _"We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives, that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate—we cannot hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."_
> 
> 
> Men have already paid the full price of the nation's sins.  To make others pay for sins which are not theirs is wholly unjust.
> 
> We must not forget, nor should we make others pay for those sins that it should cause further enmity and recriminations through history.
> 
> _With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan—to do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations._


No the US has not paid for even a tiny fraction of the nations sins.  We arent making individuals pay. This is a national debt.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Everything, do try and keep up.  You said  this:
> 
> "We are talking about human rights violations."
> 
> 
> 
> No I didnt say that but again I ask what did your question have to do with the topic?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
Click to expand...


No because your great grandfathers family would have be able to collect for the death if the death was proven caused by the railroad. Blacks were never allowed to take the case to a court. Your opposition to this is based on  ignorance.


----------



## IM2

MisterBeale said:


> _"We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives, that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate—we cannot hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."_
> 
> 
> Men have already paid the full price of the nation's sins.  To make others pay for sins which are not theirs is wholly unjust.
> 
> We must not forget, nor should we make others pay for those sins that it should cause further enmity and recriminations through history.
> 
> _With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan—to do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations._



Please stop pretending whites are not practicing racism today. That would mean the sins are committed by his generation..


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> There’s no precedent yet for slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
Click to expand...


We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a precedent for reparations. Keep up. Thats the topic.
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
Click to expand...


It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
Click to expand...


I do think that if you have not studied such things as the impact of slavery that you need to do so before you start talking about what you question. The racism of today began during slavery. So each time there is an instance of white racsm that is one impact of slavery on blacks today. The sins of the fathers repeated.

An American Tragedy: The legacy of slavery lingers in our cities’ ghettos

Where slavery thrived, inequality rules today - The Boston Globe

Slavery’s Legacy: Race-Based Economic Inequality

Legacy of Slavery Still Fuels Anti-Black Attitudes in the Deep South

The historical roots of inequality: Evidence from slavery in the US | VOX, CEPR Policy Portal

How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today

Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome - Theory and Book | Joy DeGruy


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do think that if you have not studied such things as the impact of slavery that you need to do so before you start talking about what you question. The racism of today began during slavery. So each time there is an instance of white racsm that is one impact of slavery on blacks today. The sins of the fathers repeated.
> 
> An American Tragedy: The legacy of slavery lingers in our cities’ ghettos
> 
> Where slavery thrived, inequality rules today - The Boston Globe
> 
> Slavery’s Legacy: Race-Based Economic Inequality
> 
> Legacy of Slavery Still Fuels Anti-Black Attitudes in the Deep South
> 
> The historical roots of inequality: Evidence from slavery in the US | VOX, CEPR Policy Portal
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome - Theory and Book | Joy DeGruy
Click to expand...


As I said, there is an argument that slavery continues to affect people today.  Proving it, however, is different.  Proving it in the context of reparations is different still.

The right jury could certainly be convinced, but I don't know if this sort of issue would go before a jury.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Based on?
> You wouldn’t even get to a court room.
> Precedent based on what wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
Click to expand...

It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
Click to expand...

The behavior exhibited in Africa?
Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
And who’s to blame?

I don’t buy it.
GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.


----------



## Indeependent

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do think that if you have not studied such things as the impact of slavery that you need to do so before you start talking about what you question. The racism of today began during slavery. So each time there is an instance of white racsm that is one impact of slavery on blacks today. The sins of the fathers repeated.
> 
> An American Tragedy: The legacy of slavery lingers in our cities’ ghettos
> 
> Where slavery thrived, inequality rules today - The Boston Globe
> 
> Slavery’s Legacy: Race-Based Economic Inequality
> 
> Legacy of Slavery Still Fuels Anti-Black Attitudes in the Deep South
> 
> The historical roots of inequality: Evidence from slavery in the US | VOX, CEPR Policy Portal
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome - Theory and Book | Joy DeGruy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As I said, there is an argument that slavery continues to affect people today.  Proving it, however, is different.  Proving it in the context of reparations is different still.
> 
> The right jury could certainly be convinced, but I don't know if this sort of issue would go before a jury.
Click to expand...

The descendants of slave will never recover!
Oh my!!!!!

The descendants of Holocaust survivors will never recover!
Oh my!!!!!

But wait!
The descendants of Holocaust survivors did recover and own or run some of the most successful businesses on earth.

Well, so much for that “will never recover” bullcrap.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Given these dopes logic, If my great  great great great grandfather were run over and killed by a train in 1857, I could sue for damages.
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
Click to expand...


If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.  

Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
Click to expand...


When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
Click to expand...

Thats a white shortcoming I can do nothing about. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





I dont think in terms of all because there are always exceptions to the rule. For instance Carson would probably claim he bears no scars of slavery.  Carsons mind is polluted by white think so I would expect others like him to feel the same.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
Click to expand...

Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
Click to expand...

Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> 
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
Click to expand...

That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t seem to understand the concept of Precedent based on legal nomenclature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
Click to expand...


Actually it does. Especially when whites do not desire to study or learn anything about the issue. And your last question is stupid. So if 1 black person doesn't agree I guess that means the other 99 who do say this is proven must be wrong?  There are just some things is whites here need to learn when it comes to issues affecting the black community you haven't studied. One of them is: just because you think something is not true does not mean that's so.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> 
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
Click to expand...

Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
Click to expand...


LOL! You don't know what the hell you are talking about.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
Click to expand...

It’s my way of stating you’re a self pitying idiot.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> 
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL! You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
Click to expand...

You can’t succeed because you want the easy money.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It’s my way of stating you’re a self pitying idiot.
Click to expand...

Now youre angry.  Dont get angry. Get a better and more persuasive argument.  So far you suck at this.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It’s my way of stating you’re a self pitying idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now youre angry.  Dont get angry. Get a better and more persuasive argument.  So far you suck at this.
Click to expand...

Angry?
I laid out exactly why you’ve never seen the inside of a court room concerning this issue.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> 
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL! You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can’t succeed because you want the easy money.
Click to expand...


Yeah that's why I retired at 52. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually it does. Especially when whites do not desire to study or learn anything about the issue. And your last question is stupid. So if 1 black person doesn't agree I guess that means the other 99 who do say this is proven must be wrong?  There are just some things is whites here need to learn when it comes to issues affecting the black community you haven't studied. One of them is: just because you think something is not true does not mean that's so.
Click to expand...


No, if someone must be black to know something has been proven, it is not objectively proven.  Objectively indicates that you don't have to be part of a certain group to accept the results.

I'm not the one who said I would know something has been proven if I were black.  That would indicate all blacks know it has been proven.    Further, you want to focus on blacks and whites, but if someone must be black to know something has been proven, that leaves out Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans, all other races.

I also have never said that slavery affecting blacks isn't real.  Instead, I have argued that it is something that would be very difficult to prove, such as would need to be done if reparations were to be paid for slavery.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL! You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can’t succeed because you want the easy money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah that's why I retired at 52. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
Click to expand...

If I lived in your neighborhood, I would have retired at 30.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don't care, they just want a check.  Not a one could prove they were damaged in any way by slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats a white shortcoming I can do nothing about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think in terms of all because there are always exceptions to the rule. For instance Carson would probably claim he bears no scars of slavery.  Carsons mind is polluted by white think so I would expect others like him to feel the same.
Click to expand...


Why is it a white shortcoming?  If someone has to be black to accept a proof, that makes it a shortcoming of everyone who is not black, not just whites.

If there are exceptions, then merely being black is not enough to accept the proof.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL! You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can’t succeed because you want the easy money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah that's why I retired at 52. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
Click to expand...

By the way, most union workers retire at 52.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> 
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It’s my way of stating you’re a self pitying idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now youre angry.  Dont get angry. Get a better and more persuasive argument.  So far you suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Angry?
> I laid out exactly why you’ve never seen the inside of a court room concerning this issue.
Click to expand...


----------



## Indeependent

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats a white shortcoming I can do nothing about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think in terms of all because there are always exceptions to the rule. For instance Carson would probably claim he bears no scars of slavery.  Carsons mind is polluted by white think so I would expect others like him to feel the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it a white shortcoming?  If someone has to be black to accept a proof, that makes it a shortcoming of everyone who is not black, not just whites.
> 
> If there are exceptions, then merely being black is not enough to accept the proof.
Click to expand...

Enuf with the facts!!!!!


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It’s my way of stating you’re a self pitying idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now youre angry.  Dont get angry. Get a better and more persuasive argument.  So far you suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Angry?
> I laid out exactly why you’ve never seen the inside of a court room concerning this issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Have you ever been in a courtroom for anything other than misbehaving?


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> The behavior exhibited in Africa?
> Similar to the behavior exhibited in America?
> And who’s to blame?
> 
> I don’t buy it.
> GW had banks giving out cash left and right to Black neighborhoods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
Click to expand...


Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL! You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can’t succeed because you want the easy money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah that's why I retired at 52. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> By the way, most union workers retire at 52.
Click to expand...


So?


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> It’s my way of stating you’re a self pitying idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now youre angry.  Dont get angry. Get a better and more persuasive argument.  So far you suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Angry?
> I laid out exactly why you’ve never seen the inside of a court room concerning this issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Have you ever been in a courtroom for anything other than misbehaving?
Click to expand...


Have you?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL! You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can’t succeed because you want the easy money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah that's why I retired at 52. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> By the way, most union workers retire at 52.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So?
Click to expand...

Congratulations!!!


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We can prove that we were damaged by slavery and on top of that we can add on continued actions after slavery until this day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats a white shortcoming I can do nothing about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think in terms of all because there are always exceptions to the rule. For instance Carson would probably claim he bears no scars of slavery.  Carsons mind is polluted by white think so I would expect others like him to feel the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it a white shortcoming?  If someone has to be black to accept a proof, that makes it a shortcoming of everyone who is not black, not just whites.
> 
> If there are exceptions, then merely being black is not enough to accept the proof.
Click to expand...

I dont know why exactly. Its just something I see whites demonstrate time and time again.  Maybe its because they assume they are the authority on everything and forget they are last to education.  Other races seem to get it at least from the ones I have spoken with on the issue.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
Click to expand...


Montrovant we are a minority in a largely white country.  We have to understand whites to survive.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> It seems questionable that you can prove you, personally, were damaged by slavery.  There's certainly an argument for it, but objective proof seems like a stretch.  The issues that remained or occurred after slavery, or that are around now, is a different issue.
> 
> 
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats a white shortcoming I can do nothing about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think in terms of all because there are always exceptions to the rule. For instance Carson would probably claim he bears no scars of slavery.  Carsons mind is polluted by white think so I would expect others like him to feel the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it a white shortcoming?  If someone has to be black to accept a proof, that makes it a shortcoming of everyone who is not black, not just whites.
> 
> If there are exceptions, then merely being black is not enough to accept the proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont know why exactly. Its just something I see whites demonstrate time and time again.  Maybe its because they assume they are the authority on everything and forget they are last to education.  Other races seem to get it at least from the ones I have spoken with on the issue.
Click to expand...


Ah, so one doesn't need to be black to accept that slavery has been proven to continue to affect people in the US.

Perhaps it would be better to rephrase and say that slavery does not have a direct affect on anyone in the US today (outside of exceptions such as human trafficking), and such a direct affect might be a requirement for any legal case for reparations.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL! You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can’t succeed because you want the easy money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah that's why I retired at 52. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If I lived in your neighborhood, I would have retired at 30.
Click to expand...


I doubt it.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Montrovant we are a minority in a largely white country.  We have to understand whites to survive.
Click to expand...


So whites cannot understand blacks, but blacks all understand whites or they wouldn't survive.  That is...pretty out there.    Do all minorities understand whites, and are whites incapable of understanding all minorities?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s my way of stating you’re a self pitying idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> Now youre angry.  Dont get angry. Get a better and more persuasive argument.  So far you suck at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Angry?
> I laid out exactly why you’ve never seen the inside of a court room concerning this issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Have you ever been in a courtroom for anything other than misbehaving?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Have you?
Click to expand...

On several occasions.
Also 2 depositions.
I’m also friends with a few dozen attorneys; mostly Blue Dog Democrats.
Much easier to have a conversation with than most MDs.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL! You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can’t succeed because you want the easy money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah that's why I retired at 52. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If I lived in your neighborhood, I would have retired at 30.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I doubt it.
Click to expand...

I hope I don’t have to carry a gun.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you start talking about these matters it would help if you knew what the hell you were taking about.
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
Click to expand...

I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
Click to expand...

Most Blacks are indoctrinated, not dumb.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such as the Black neighborhood I grew up in...East New York and the Black neighborhoods I frequent for work?
> You were just hoping a Honky who knows you’re full of shit wasn’t on the board.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
Click to expand...


If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> 
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most Blacks are indoctrinated, not dumb.
Click to expand...

dumb is roughly the same thing as indoctrinated in Ebonics.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats simply a long winded way of saying you have a Black friend.
> 
> 
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
Click to expand...

I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats a white shortcoming I can do nothing about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think in terms of all because there are always exceptions to the rule. For instance Carson would probably claim he bears no scars of slavery.  Carsons mind is polluted by white think so I would expect others like him to feel the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it a white shortcoming?  If someone has to be black to accept a proof, that makes it a shortcoming of everyone who is not black, not just whites.
> 
> If there are exceptions, then merely being black is not enough to accept the proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont know why exactly. Its just something I see whites demonstrate time and time again.  Maybe its because they assume they are the authority on everything and forget they are last to education.  Other races seem to get it at least from the ones I have spoken with on the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah, so one doesn't need to be black to accept that slavery has been proven to continue to affect people in the US.
> 
> Perhaps it would be better to rephrase and say that slavery does not have a direct affect on anyone in the US today (outside of exceptions such as human trafficking), and such a direct affect might be a requirement for any legal case for reparations.
Click to expand...

I never said one needs to be Black. I suggested that being Black would help you understand.

I cant rephrase it to say that. I know for a fact slavery has an affect on Black people this very moment here in the US. Its not up for debate. I'm just informing you of my conclusion and that of mental health professionals in the field.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
Click to expand...


People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats a white shortcoming I can do nothing about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think in terms of all because there are always exceptions to the rule. For instance Carson would probably claim he bears no scars of slavery.  Carsons mind is polluted by white think so I would expect others like him to feel the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it a white shortcoming?  If someone has to be black to accept a proof, that makes it a shortcoming of everyone who is not black, not just whites.
> 
> If there are exceptions, then merely being black is not enough to accept the proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont know why exactly. Its just something I see whites demonstrate time and time again.  Maybe its because they assume they are the authority on everything and forget they are last to education.  Other races seem to get it at least from the ones I have spoken with on the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah, so one doesn't need to be black to accept that slavery has been proven to continue to affect people in the US.
> 
> Perhaps it would be better to rephrase and say that slavery does not have a direct affect on anyone in the US today (outside of exceptions such as human trafficking), and such a direct affect might be a requirement for any legal case for reparations.
Click to expand...


No it would not. There is far too much information to the contrary of what you claim.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
Click to expand...

Here in the US I would disagree. Canada and europe seem to not have this issue.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
> 
> 
> 
> Thats a white shortcoming I can do nothing about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think in terms of all because there are always exceptions to the rule. For instance Carson would probably claim he bears no scars of slavery.  Carsons mind is polluted by white think so I would expect others like him to feel the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it a white shortcoming?  If someone has to be black to accept a proof, that makes it a shortcoming of everyone who is not black, not just whites.
> 
> If there are exceptions, then merely being black is not enough to accept the proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont know why exactly. Its just something I see whites demonstrate time and time again.  Maybe its because they assume they are the authority on everything and forget they are last to education.  Other races seem to get it at least from the ones I have spoken with on the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah, so one doesn't need to be black to accept that slavery has been proven to continue to affect people in the US.
> 
> Perhaps it would be better to rephrase and say that slavery does not have a direct affect on anyone in the US today (outside of exceptions such as human trafficking), and such a direct affect might be a requirement for any legal case for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said one needs to be Black. I suggested that being Black would help you understand.
> 
> I cant rephrase it to say that. I know for a fact slavery has an affect on Black people this very moment here in the US. Its not up for debate. I'm just informing you of my conclusion and that of mental health professionals in the field.
Click to expand...


You did say that, actually.  To directly quote you:


Asclepias said:


> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.



I'm not asking what *you *have concluded.  I've been discussing what can be objectively proven, in particular in a legal sense in regards to reparations.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> If someone has to be black to know something, it hasn't been objectively proven.
> 
> Also, do you honestly think all blacks consider this something proven?
> 
> 
> 
> Thats a white shortcoming I can do nothing about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think in terms of all because there are always exceptions to the rule. For instance Carson would probably claim he bears no scars of slavery.  Carsons mind is polluted by white think so I would expect others like him to feel the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it a white shortcoming?  If someone has to be black to accept a proof, that makes it a shortcoming of everyone who is not black, not just whites.
> 
> If there are exceptions, then merely being black is not enough to accept the proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont know why exactly. Its just something I see whites demonstrate time and time again.  Maybe its because they assume they are the authority on everything and forget they are last to education.  Other races seem to get it at least from the ones I have spoken with on the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah, so one doesn't need to be black to accept that slavery has been proven to continue to affect people in the US.
> 
> Perhaps it would be better to rephrase and say that slavery does not have a direct affect on anyone in the US today (outside of exceptions such as human trafficking), and such a direct affect might be a requirement for any legal case for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No it would not. There is far too much information to the contrary of what you claim.
Click to expand...


I think you are using a different definition for 'direct affect' than me.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats a white shortcoming I can do nothing about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think in terms of all because there are always exceptions to the rule. For instance Carson would probably claim he bears no scars of slavery.  Carsons mind is polluted by white think so I would expect others like him to feel the same.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a white shortcoming?  If someone has to be black to accept a proof, that makes it a shortcoming of everyone who is not black, not just whites.
> 
> If there are exceptions, then merely being black is not enough to accept the proof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont know why exactly. Its just something I see whites demonstrate time and time again.  Maybe its because they assume they are the authority on everything and forget they are last to education.  Other races seem to get it at least from the ones I have spoken with on the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah, so one doesn't need to be black to accept that slavery has been proven to continue to affect people in the US.
> 
> Perhaps it would be better to rephrase and say that slavery does not have a direct affect on anyone in the US today (outside of exceptions such as human trafficking), and such a direct affect might be a requirement for any legal case for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said one needs to be Black. I suggested that being Black would help you understand.
> 
> I cant rephrase it to say that. I know for a fact slavery has an affect on Black people this very moment here in the US. Its not up for debate. I'm just informing you of my conclusion and that of mental health professionals in the field.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You did say that, actually.  To directly quote you:
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking what *you *have concluded.  I've been discussing what can be objectively proven, in particular in a legal sense in regards to reparations.
Click to expand...

Actually I didnt. You claimed that I said one *needs* to be Black. I specifically said you would know *if* you were Black. That doesnt limit other races from knowing. Just gives you a better chance of knowing.

I didnt say you asked me. I just let you know I along with mental health experts have arrived at the same conclusion.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s a nomal way of saying you’re a racist moron.
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most Blacks are indoctrinated, not dumb.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> dumb is roughly the same thing as indoctrinated in Ebonics.
Click to expand...

Most of the Blacks I meet start speaking much better English when I encourage them that I won’t tell on them.
I will not disparage a human being because of his race or neighborhood.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
Click to expand...


You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?

How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans

How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today

The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> 
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
Click to expand...

3,000 years later...


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most Blacks are indoctrinated, not dumb.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> dumb is roughly the same thing as indoctrinated in Ebonics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most of the Blacks I meet start speaking much better English when I encourage them that I won’t tell on them.
> I will not disparage a human being because of his race or neighborhood.
Click to expand...

Its not a matter of speaking *better* english....its a matter of speaking Ebonics vs english.  Take me for instance. I worked in the corporate world where the vast majority of whites lacked the skill to speak Ebonics. So I had to speak in english to them by default. That doesnt make Ebonics better. It just makes the two different. Your assumption that english is better is just another manifestation of the mental illness whites seem to have. So while you claim you wouldnt disparage a human you just did over their language.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 3,000 years later...
Click to expand...

Except 3k years havent passed.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Its an plea to us to accept you by claiming you grew up in a Black neighborhood so therefore you understand Blacks. Sorry to break it to you. You dont and we still believe you dont know jack shit about Blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most Blacks are indoctrinated, not dumb.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> dumb is roughly the same thing as indoctrinated in Ebonics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most of the Blacks I meet start speaking much better English when I encourage them that I won’t tell on them.
> I will not disparage a human being because of his race or neighborhood.
Click to expand...


I've lived 57 years black and have never heard ebonics.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 3,000 years later...
Click to expand...


The dumb white man.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a white shortcoming?  If someone has to be black to accept a proof, that makes it a shortcoming of everyone who is not black, not just whites.
> 
> If there are exceptions, then merely being black is not enough to accept the proof.
> 
> 
> 
> I dont know why exactly. Its just something I see whites demonstrate time and time again.  Maybe its because they assume they are the authority on everything and forget they are last to education.  Other races seem to get it at least from the ones I have spoken with on the issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah, so one doesn't need to be black to accept that slavery has been proven to continue to affect people in the US.
> 
> Perhaps it would be better to rephrase and say that slavery does not have a direct affect on anyone in the US today (outside of exceptions such as human trafficking), and such a direct affect might be a requirement for any legal case for reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said one needs to be Black. I suggested that being Black would help you understand.
> 
> I cant rephrase it to say that. I know for a fact slavery has an affect on Black people this very moment here in the US. Its not up for debate. I'm just informing you of my conclusion and that of mental health professionals in the field.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You did say that, actually.  To directly quote you:
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> It only seems questionable to you. Its been proven repeatedly over the years.  You would know this if you were Black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not asking what *you *have concluded.  I've been discussing what can be objectively proven, in particular in a legal sense in regards to reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually I didnt. You claimed that I said one *needs* to be Black. I specifically said you would know *if* you were Black. That doesnt limit other races from knowing. Just gives you a better chance of knowing.
> 
> I didnt say you asked me. I just let you know I along with mental health experts have arrived at the same conclusion.
Click to expand...


Fair enough!  I certainly made a mistake with that.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a related question: Do you think you understand whites?  You certainly give that impression.  What about Asians?  Native Americans?  Do you understand races other than your own?
> 
> 
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
Click to expand...


What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?

Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
Click to expand...

Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 3,000 years later...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The dumb white man.
Click to expand...


It is probably statements like this, which seem to be describing all white men as dumb, that lead to some calling you racist.

And yes, there are posters on here that describe blacks as dumb.  Those posters are fools.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
Click to expand...


What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
Click to expand...

Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me. 

The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
Click to expand...


I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.

For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.

Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 3,000 years later...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The dumb white man.
Click to expand...

You never heard, “Bang a baby out of her ass”?
I have...1,000 times, which is 1,000 more times than I wanted to hear it.


----------



## Hellbilly

TheParser said:


> I hope that NO (formal) reparation is granted.
> 
> It would only lead to one new  demand after another.


Like when the white man invaded our land.


Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## Hellbilly

MizMolly said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karpenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is That Right ??
> I Live In A Major Metropolitan Area In The Heartland
> Could You Give Me A Lead On How That Is ??
> In Your Eyes...
> Could You Be Specific
> With Examples Of What You Say Is Identical
> Oh, No
> Our Pay-Checks Don't Grow On Trees Either
> We Know When We Are Layed Off
> Maybe We Just Buck-It-Up
> And Move On To Seek Other Opportunities
> 
> Maybe It's Just How You View Things
> What Is The First Thing You See In This:
> 
> opportunityisnowhere
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I view things from a reality perspective. We have all seen how you view things from a perspective of all blacks are victims, all whites are bad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't view anything from reality nor do I view anything from all blacks are victims and all whites are bad. W are in the fucking race and racism section talking about slavery. No matter how you try to paint the picture, whites were the bad guys as it pertains to slavery in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they were, so were the blacks who sold them into slavery and the blacks who owned slaves
Click to expand...

Not justification for what white people did to blacks. 
Epic fail. 

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## Indeependent

Billyboom said:


> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's called federal, State and local funding.  I've mentioned specific things an I'm not going into more detail with a person who makes comments and doesn't do what I'm being asked now.  Whites don't buck up. Whites like you and some others here are cowards who don't want to discuss the truth about how they have done things.
> 
> And that's not how I view things.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I view things from a reality perspective. We have all seen how you view things from a perspective of all blacks are victims, all whites are bad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't view anything from reality nor do I view anything from all blacks are victims and all whites are bad. W are in the fucking race and racism section talking about slavery. No matter how you try to paint the picture, whites were the bad guys as it pertains to slavery in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they were, so were the blacks who sold them into slavery and the blacks who owned slaves
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not justification for what white people did to blacks.
> Epic fail.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Elaborate.
Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.


----------



## Indeependent

Billyboom said:


> TheParser said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope that NO (formal) reparation is granted.
> 
> It would only lead to one new  demand after another.
> 
> 
> 
> Like when the white man invaded our land.
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

When and who?
British?
French?


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
Click to expand...


Nobody is doing that and you whites here just need to understand that whites as a race have a 242 record so always talking about what all whites did not do adds nothing to the conversation and is always used as a diversion.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> "And that's not how I view things"
> We are well aware of how you view things.
> 
> 
> 
> I view things from a reality perspective. We have all seen how you view things from a perspective of all blacks are victims, all whites are bad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't view anything from reality nor do I view anything from all blacks are victims and all whites are bad. W are in the fucking race and racism section talking about slavery. No matter how you try to paint the picture, whites were the bad guys as it pertains to slavery in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they were, so were the blacks who sold them into slavery and the blacks who owned slaves
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not justification for what white people did to blacks.
> Epic fail.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
Click to expand...


Can't start from there because that's not how it started.


----------



## Hellbilly

Indeependent said:


> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheParser said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope that NO (formal) reparation is granted.
> 
> It would only lead to one new  demand after another.
> 
> 
> 
> Like when the white man invaded our land.
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When and who?
> British?
> French?
Click to expand...

Google is your friend.
Look it up.
I am not here to educate you.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 3,000 years later...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The dumb white man.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is probably statements like this, which seem to be describing all white men as dumb, that lead to some calling you racist.
> 
> And yes, there are posters on here that describe blacks as dumb.  Those posters are fools.
Click to expand...


And since the statement did not say or even infer that all whites are dumb, then you making that claim shows that you are just as stupid.

*The “not all whites” argument*
Saturday December 17th 2011 by abagond

*The “not all whites” argument* is a common straw man argument on this blog. I will make some statement about whites and then be informed that “not all whites” are like that, that they are Individuals. *Like there is some special rule of English that “whites” always means “all whites”*. Even when I say “some whites” or “most whites” it can still be taken to mean “all whites” – since clearly I only put in those words as a cheap trick to fool people.

In America, according to the government numbers, whites are supposedly better at reading than blacks. I would never know that from this blog: Only rarely do black commenters seriously misunderstand me while it is quite common for whites. And this imagined “all” before “whites” – which is *not in any grammar book I know of* – is one of the main causes.

*Example:* When I say, *“Whites owned slaves*” it hardly means they all owned slaves. As far as I know no more than 2% of White Americans ever did. Yet that does not make the statement untrue or meaningless. Because quantity is not the issue – it was never stated. To make quantity the issue is a derailment. To assume it means “All whites owned slaves” is putting words in my mouth and creating a straw man argument.

*Side note:* On this blog, unless it is otherwise clear, *“white”* mostly means just White Americans, though  most of what I say seems to apply to English-speaking whites in general.

Since the “all whites” thing is not in any grammar book I wonder where it comes from. The best reason I have heard so far is that many White Americans use *dichotomous thinking*, seeing things as either-or.  That means it is easy for them to think of whites as either being all the same or all Unique Individuals Unaffected by Race or Culture, leaving little middle ground between the two extremes.

*So if I say “whites are racist”* it is taken to mean that _all_ whites are racist and racist in the _same_ way. As if I said, “All whites are skinhead racists.”  But *what is in my head is a range:*


from skinhead racists
to Jim Crow racists
to scientific racists
to “The Bell Curve” sorts
to black pathologists
to white Republicans
to ordinary colour-blind racists
to white liberal racists
to white anti-racist racists
to those souls who are not racist at all
to those who fought against the slave trade
to the white Freedom Riders
to John Brown
– and much more besides.

*I know whites are individuals*. I live in a country that is mostly white. I have to deal with whites at work. I watch American film and television where whites are given whole story lines complete with a love life, where they are almost never reduced to stereotypes as whites.

So I expect them to be individuals. Which makes it all the more surprising and interesting to me when they do seem to act from a* hive mind*.

The “not all whites” argument


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> I view things from a reality perspective. We have all seen how you view things from a perspective of all blacks are victims, all whites are bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't view anything from reality nor do I view anything from all blacks are victims and all whites are bad. W are in the fucking race and racism section talking about slavery. No matter how you try to paint the picture, whites were the bad guys as it pertains to slavery in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they were, so were the blacks who sold them into slavery and the blacks who owned slaves
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not justification for what white people did to blacks.
> Epic fail.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
Click to expand...

So selling family members is OK.
Uh huh.


----------



## Indeependent

Billyboom said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheParser said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope that NO (formal) reparation is granted.
> 
> It would only lead to one new  demand after another.
> 
> 
> 
> Like when the white man invaded our land.
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When and who?
> British?
> French?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Google is your friend.
> Look it up.
> I am not here to educate you.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It’s obvious you’re not all here at all.


----------



## Hellbilly

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't view anything from reality nor do I view anything from all blacks are victims and all whites are bad. W are in the fucking race and racism section talking about slavery. No matter how you try to paint the picture, whites were the bad guys as it pertains to slavery in America.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they were, so were the blacks who sold them into slavery and the blacks who owned slaves
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not justification for what white people did to blacks.
> Epic fail.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
Click to expand...


So, breaking up families is ok?
Uh huh.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## Indeependent

Billyboom said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they were, so were the blacks who sold them into slavery and the blacks who owned slaves
> 
> 
> 
> Not justification for what white people did to blacks.
> Epic fail.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Trespassers?
Yes.
And families are broken up all the time by our *legal* system.
Now back to *selling* family members...


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand enough about whites to mistrust them and navigate my way around, over, or through them.. I grew up with Asians, Mexicans, Samoans and Blacks. My great grandmother is NA and I have some friends that are NA. I understand them them a lot better than whites as we tend to agree on one thing. Whites have mental issues as a group. Its called cognitive dissonance.  My first African friend from Eritrea put it best. White people are crazy and Blacks are dumb for believing their lies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
Click to expand...


And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't view anything from reality nor do I view anything from all blacks are victims and all whites are bad. W are in the fucking race and racism section talking about slavery. No matter how you try to paint the picture, whites were the bad guys as it pertains to slavery in America.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they were, so were the blacks who sold them into slavery and the blacks who owned slaves
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not justification for what white people did to blacks.
> Epic fail.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
Click to expand...


Selling family members did not happen.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not justification for what white people did to blacks.
> Epic fail.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> Yes.
> And families are broken up all the time by our *legal* system.
> Now back to *selling* family members...
Click to expand...


You are a trespasser.
There is nothing to go back to.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MizMolly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they were, so were the blacks who sold them into slavery and the blacks who owned slaves
> 
> 
> 
> Not justification for what white people did to blacks.
> Epic fail.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Selling family members did not happen.
Click to expand...

Blackapedia?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> Yes.
> And families are broken up all the time by our *legal* system.
> Now back to *selling* family members...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is nothing to go back to.
Click to expand...

You are free to return to Afica and get your reparations from Bill Gates.


----------



## Hellbilly

Indeependent said:


> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not justification for what white people did to blacks.
> Epic fail.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
Click to expand...


No. Slaves and Native Americans.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not justification for what white people did to blacks.
> Epic fail.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Selling family members did not happen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Blackapedia?
Click to expand...


Your lie is from whiteypedia.

Selling family members did not happen.


----------



## Indeependent

Billyboom said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. Slaves and Native Americans.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.

NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> 
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> Yes.
> And families are broken up all the time by our *legal* system.
> Now back to *selling* family members...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is nothing to go back to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are free to return to Afica and get your reparations from Bill Gates.
Click to expand...


I am free to be in America right now talking about the money we are owed. If you don't like it, there is always Iceland were you can go live with all the whiteness you want.


----------



## Hellbilly

Indeependent said:


> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> 
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. Slaves and Native Americans.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.
> 
> NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.
Click to expand...


Wrong. Slave owners sold slaves to other slave owners. 

NA families were murdered by the government due to the Indian Removal Act.




Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Elaborate.
> Start from Africans selling their family members to Dutch traders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> Yes.
> And families are broken up all the time by our *legal* system.
> Now back to *selling* family members...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a trespasser.
> There is nothing to go back to.
Click to expand...


What utter dumbfuckery.. Native Americans are not "native" to North America.  Go read a book.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> 
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. Slaves and Native Americans.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.
> 
> NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.
Click to expand...


No, blacks were only sold by their families on stormfront.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't start from there because that's not how it started.
> 
> 
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> Yes.
> And families are broken up all the time by our *legal* system.
> Now back to *selling* family members...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a trespasser.
> There is nothing to go back to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What utter dumbfuckery.. Native Americans are not "native" to North America.  Go read a book.
Click to expand...


I've read plenty. Just deal with the fact that these guys were here looking at whites when they got here. You whites here want to try revising everything in order to deny your own history.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
Click to expand...

I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.


----------



## IM2

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
Click to expand...


Amen!


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> Yes.
> And families are broken up all the time by our *legal* system.
> Now back to *selling* family members...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a trespasser.
> There is nothing to go back to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What utter dumbfuckery.. Native Americans are not "native" to North America.  Go read a book.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've read plenty. Just deal with the fact that these guys were here looking at whites when they got here. You whites here want to try revising everything in order to deny your own history.
Click to expand...


What does this even mean?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
Click to expand...


There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> Trespassers?
> Yes.
> And families are broken up all the time by our *legal* system.
> Now back to *selling* family members...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a trespasser.
> There is nothing to go back to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What utter dumbfuckery.. Native Americans are not "native" to North America.  Go read a book.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've read plenty. Just deal with the fact that these guys were here looking at whites when they got here. You whites here want to try revising everything in order to deny your own history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does this even mean?
Click to expand...


If you are illiterate that's your problem.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trespassers?
> Yes.
> And families are broken up all the time by our *legal* system.
> Now back to *selling* family members...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a trespasser.
> There is nothing to go back to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What utter dumbfuckery.. Native Americans are not "native" to North America.  Go read a book.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've read plenty. Just deal with the fact that these guys were here looking at whites when they got here. You whites here want to try revising everything in order to deny your own history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does this even mean?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are illiterate that's your problem.
Click to expand...


If I were illiterate I wouldn't have been able to read it you asshat.  It just makes no sense, you have issues with cogency.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
Click to expand...

I am trying to figure out why you think I am interested in what you feel about me?. Youre just some poor white boy that cant address the topic of reparations without being afraid you will lose your welfare check.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
Click to expand...


He is right.


----------



## Hellbilly

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. Slaves and Native Americans.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.
> 
> NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, blacks were only sold by their families on stormfront.
Click to expand...


Not true. 

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are a trespasser.
> There is nothing to go back to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What utter dumbfuckery.. Native Americans are not "native" to North America.  Go read a book.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've read plenty. Just deal with the fact that these guys were here looking at whites when they got here. You whites here want to try revising everything in order to deny your own history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does this even mean?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are illiterate that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I were illiterate I wouldn't have been able to read it you asshat.  It just makes no sense, you have issues with cogency.
Click to expand...


It makes plenty of sense, you are just dumb.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> 
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am trying to figure out why you think I am interested in what you feel about me?. Youre just some poor white boy that cant address the topic of reparations without being afraid you will lose your welfare check.
Click to expand...


You're a fucking idiot.  I am neither poor nor do receive welfare.  You are the one looking for a handout from the U.S. taxpayers.

Go peddle your racist bullshit elsewhere.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> What utter dumbfuckery.. Native Americans are not "native" to North America.  Go read a book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've read plenty. Just deal with the fact that these guys were here looking at whites when they got here. You whites here want to try revising everything in order to deny your own history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does this even mean?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are illiterate that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I were illiterate I wouldn't have been able to read it you asshat.  It just makes no sense, you have issues with cogency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It makes plenty of sense, you are just dumb.
Click to expand...


I can hear and speak quite well thank you, therefore I am not _dumb_.


----------



## IM2

Billyboom said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> Trespassers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. Slaves and Native Americans.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.
> 
> NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, blacks were only sold by their families on stormfront.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not true.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


It must be true because when you study how things happened that is the only place that says blacks sold family members to the dutch.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've read plenty. Just deal with the fact that these guys were here looking at whites when they got here. You whites here want to try revising everything in order to deny your own history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does this even mean?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are illiterate that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I were illiterate I wouldn't have been able to read it you asshat.  It just makes no sense, you have issues with cogency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It makes plenty of sense, you are just dumb.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can hear and speak quite well thank you, therefore I am not _dumb_.
Click to expand...


So we want to play semantics.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've read plenty. Just deal with the fact that these guys were here looking at whites when they got here. You whites here want to try revising everything in order to deny your own history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does this even mean?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are illiterate that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I were illiterate I wouldn't have been able to read it you asshat.  It just makes no sense, you have issues with cogency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It makes plenty of sense, you are just dumb.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can hear and speak quite well thank you, therefore I am not _dumb_.
Click to expand...

Its kind of obvious your just another dumb monkey.  You deny facts and precedent regarding reparations.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> 
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He is right.
Click to expand...


Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am trying to figure out why you think I am interested in what you feel about me?. Youre just some poor white boy that cant address the topic of reparations without being afraid you will lose your welfare check.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're a fucking idiot.  I am neither poor nor do receive welfare.  You are the one looking for a handout from the U.S. taxpayers.
> 
> Go peddle your racist bullshit elsewhere.
Click to expand...


Reparations are not handouts.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does this even mean?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are illiterate that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I were illiterate I wouldn't have been able to read it you asshat.  It just makes no sense, you have issues with cogency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It makes plenty of sense, you are just dumb.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can hear and speak quite well thank you, therefore I am not _dumb_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its kind of obvious your just another dumb monkey.  You deny facts and precedent regarding reparations.
Click to expand...


I am a homosapien... not a monkey... and I have already pointed out that I hear and speak.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am trying to figure out why you think I am interested in what you feel about me?. Youre just some poor white boy that cant address the topic of reparations without being afraid you will lose your welfare check.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're a fucking idiot.  I am neither poor nor do receive welfare.  You are the one looking for a handout from the U.S. taxpayers.
> 
> Go peddle your racist bullshit elsewhere.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reparations are not handouts.
Click to expand...


OK, what did you do to earn a check from the U.S. taxpayers?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does this even mean?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are illiterate that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I were illiterate I wouldn't have been able to read it you asshat.  It just makes no sense, you have issues with cogency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It makes plenty of sense, you are just dumb.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can hear and speak quite well thank you, therefore I am not _dumb_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So we want to play semantics.
Click to expand...


Words matter, especially with those that call other people "dumb"


----------



## Indeependent

Billyboom said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. Slaves and Native Americans.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.
> 
> NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong. Slave owners sold slaves to other slave owners.
> 
> NA families were murdered by the government due to the Indian Removal Act.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Slave *owners* sold *slaves*.
And so?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. Slaves and Native Americans.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.
> 
> NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, blacks were only sold by their families on stormfront.
Click to expand...

According to Stormfront, Jews and Blacks are controlling the world.
Now back to reality...


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He is right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
Click to expand...


Actually that did not happen. 

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

*Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
*
The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

*And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
*
Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> Trespassers?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. Slaves and Native Americans.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.
> 
> NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, blacks were only sold by their families on stormfront.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to Stormfront, Jews and Blacks are controlling the world.
> Now back to reality...
Click to expand...


And that reality says Africans didn't sell family members to the Dutch or anyone else.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trespassers?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Slaves and Native Americans.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.
> 
> NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, blacks were only sold by their families on stormfront.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to Stormfront, Jews and Blacks are controlling the world.
> Now back to reality...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And that reality says Africans didn't sell family members to the Dutch or anyone else.
Click to expand...

Really?
I don’t think so.
Where do you get your bullshit from?


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He is right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
Click to expand...

You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He is right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
Click to expand...

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
Click to expand...

Duh!
No free Black person became a slave.
Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> He is right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
Click to expand...

You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it.  Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it.  Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?
Click to expand...

I saw the movie.
The movie states it was a rare occurrence.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it.  Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I saw the movie.
> The movie states it was a rare occurrence.
Click to expand...

Even if true wouldnt that contradict your claim that *"No free Black person became a slave."*?

Your words not mine.

Doesnt look like it was such a rare thing after all now does it?

Africans in America/Part 3/Kidnapping in Pennsylvania

"The passage of the 1793 Fugitive Slave Act, fueled a huge and vastly profitable underground industry that took full advantage of the inferior legal status of free and enslaved blacks. The law made it possible for a white person to claim any black person as a fugitive, and placed the burden of proof on the captive. Free blacks living in Philadelphia, Cincinnati, and other cities near the borders of slave states were especially vulnerable, though several well-known cases demonstrate that no state was immune.

Slave speculators (or slavers) -- who legally purchased the rights to runaways, captured them, and then resold them at a profit -- *often seized blacks at random, banking on their inability to prove their status to the satisfaction of a magistrate.* In one case, a slave speculator who attempted to seize AME Bishop Richard Allen found himself in debtors' prison, charged with attempted kidnapping, false accusation and perjury by Allen, who dropped the charges several months later."


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
Click to expand...


Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it.  Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I saw the movie.
> The movie states it was a rare occurrence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Even if true wouldnt that contradict your claim that *"No free Black person became a slave."*?
> 
> Your words not mine.
Click to expand...

*He* was kipnapped so 100,000,000 Blacks who aren’t descendants of slaves should receive reparations.
Now please find a Link showing millions of Blacks were kidnapped into slavery.


----------



## Indeependent

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> He is right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
Click to expand...

Shhh...facts upset the racist brain.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> 
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it.  Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I saw the movie.
> The movie states it was a rare occurrence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Even if true wouldnt that contradict your claim that *"No free Black person became a slave."*?
> 
> Your words not mine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *He* was kipnapped so 100,000,000 Blacks who aren’t descendants of slaves should receive reparations.
> Now please find a Link showing millions of Blacks were kidnapped into slavery.
Click to expand...

All I need to do is find one to show you lied about no Black people being kidnapped and sold into slavery.  Well I already did that.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> He is right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
Click to expand...

Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.


----------



## toobfreak

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There you go with the "fully confident" shit again.  I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am trying to figure out why you think I am interested in what you feel about me?. Youre just some poor white boy that cant address the topic of reparations without being afraid you will lose your welfare check.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're a fucking idiot.  I am neither poor nor do receive welfare.  You are the one looking for a handout from the U.S. taxpayers.
> 
> Go peddle your racist bullshit elsewhere.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reparations are not handouts.
Click to expand...



*Absolutely nothing but handouts* since they are going to people who were never wronged for a damned thing.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
Click to expand...

Whites were slaves also.
They recovered.
Maybe they became Black and didn’t recover?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
Click to expand...


How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
Click to expand...

In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
Click to expand...


So, you claim that things are recorded aren't always true, then rely on Columbus' journal ( a recording) to bolster you claim t hat blacks were here in North America before Columbus got here, even though he never set foot on American Soil?

Do you realize how asinine  that is?


----------



## Indeependent

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
Click to expand...

NA Native Americans...even the ones from what is currently known as Canada.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
Click to expand...

Uh huh.
Because Columbus bought and sold millions of African slaves.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uh huh.
> Because Columbus bought and sold millions of African slaves.
Click to expand...

Columbus had never been to N. America so where did the Africans come from prior to his arrival?


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you claim that things are recorded aren't always true, then rely on Columbus' journal ( a recording) to bolster you claim t hat blacks were here in North America before Columbus got here, even though he never set foot on American Soil?
> 
> Do you realize how asinine  that is?
Click to expand...

Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nobody is doing that and you whites here just need to understand that whites as a race have a 242 record so always talking about what all whites did not do adds nothing to the conversation and is always used as a diversion.
Click to expand...


I don't know what a 242 record is.

I'm not using anything as a diversion.  If you falsely describe an entire race as having a characteristic, for example cognitive dissonance regarding reparations, you are engaging in just the sort of generalizing and false stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.

That does not mean that there is no history of the white majority oppressing blacks (and other minorities) in the US.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you honestly believe that, that is the sort of racial grouping and stereotyping that is the hallmark of racism.
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
Click to expand...




What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?

And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.

What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> 
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uh huh.
> Because Columbus bought and sold millions of African slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Columbus had never been to N. America so where did the Africans come from prior to his arrival?
Click to expand...

And if they were?
BFD.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites were slaves also.
> They recovered.
> Maybe they became Black and didn’t recover?
Click to expand...


Another dumb comment that's oblivious to the facts of American history..


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uh huh.
> Because Columbus bought and sold millions of African slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Columbus had never been to N. America so where did the Africans come from prior to his arrival?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And if they were?
> BFD.
Click to expand...

Now youre angry because I proved your comment was lie?  Dont be like that. Get a better argument.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites were slaves also.
> They recovered.
> Maybe they became Black and didn’t recover?
Click to expand...

Whites were not slaves. At least not in the US. They were indentured servants and it didnt affect them for generations.

They recovered because other whites gave them handouts


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> 
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you claim that things are recorded aren't always true, then rely on Columbus' journal ( a recording) to bolster you claim t hat blacks were here in North America before Columbus got here, even though he never set foot on American Soil?
> 
> Do you realize how asinine  that is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.
Click to expand...


Are you pretty confident that Diego Columbus brought slaves to North America?  Because he didn't, the closest he ever got was Santo Domingo.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you claim that things are recorded aren't always true, then rely on Columbus' journal ( a recording) to bolster you claim t hat blacks were here in North America before Columbus got here, even though he never set foot on American Soil?
> 
> Do you realize how asinine  that is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you pretty confident that Diego Columbus brought slaves to North America?  Because he didn't, the closest he ever got was Santo Domingo.
Click to expand...

I never said Diego brought slaves to N. America but you do realize Santa Domingo is in N.America right?

https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/capitals-of-north-america.html


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes that is what I meant. I actually specified I didnt see this mental illness in Canada and in the places I went in europe like Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is the specific mental illness?  Cognitive dissonance is kind of non-specific.  What are the contradictory beliefs that all whites in the US hold?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.
> 
> The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs.  If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.
> 
> For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either.  It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs.  For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves.  If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.
> 
> Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not.  This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in.  There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy.  There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure.  No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.
Click to expand...


You're making a false argument.  Saying that reparations should not be made in one case but should in another does not indicate cognitive dissonance.  Cognitive dissonance is about having contradictory beliefs.  It is not contradictory simply to say that not every case for reparations is valid.

Further, not all whites are opposed to reparations for slavery.

Further, you would have to assume all whites who do oppose reparations for slavery oppose it for the same reasons.

Further, you would have to assume that whites opposing reparations for slavery even realize that other reparations have been paid in the past (I would guess there are quite a few people who have no idea).

What you appear to be doing is ascribing beliefs you expect people to have as though they must have those beliefs.  In other words, you're using a personal stereotype to generalize whites in the US.  Maybe you are extrapolating from personal interactions you've had, or things you've read, I don't know.  Whatever your reasons, you're speaking for a group of more than 100 million people (adult whites in the US) as though they all think the same on this subject and you know how they think.

The idea that reparations should only go to directly affected persons is a perfectly valid opinion.  It does not need to be in the definition to be valid; it's merely an opinion about the circumstances in which reparations should apply.  That you disagree with it does not mean it is "simply an escape clause to relive [sic] the mental pressure."  The impression you give is that you will dismiss any opinion contrary to your own in order to maintain your belief that whites think a certain way as a group regarding slavery reparations.  I can only guess that you prefer dealing with or thinking of people as part a homogeneous group.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does this even mean?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are illiterate that's your problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I were illiterate I wouldn't have been able to read it you asshat.  It just makes no sense, you have issues with cogency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It makes plenty of sense, you are just dumb.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can hear and speak quite well thank you, therefore I am not _dumb_.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its kind of obvious your just another dumb monkey.  You deny facts and precedent regarding reparations.
Click to expand...


Never call someone dumb when using the wrong version of you're/your!  

It never gets old.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
> 
> 
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uh huh.
> Because Columbus bought and sold millions of African slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Columbus had never been to N. America so where did the Africans come from prior to his arrival?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And if they were?
> BFD.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now youre angry because I proved your comment was lie?  Dont be like that. Get a better argument.
Click to expand...

Do you spend all day convincing yourself that you have any idea of what’s going on?


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites were slaves also.
> They recovered.
> Maybe they became Black and didn’t recover?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whites were not slaves. At least not in the US. They were indentured servants and it didnt affect them for generations.
> 
> They recovered because other whites gave them handouts
Click to expand...

Because Blacks never received handouts.
How did NYS become a *Democrat* State?


----------



## Montrovant

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> 
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it.  Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I saw the movie.
> The movie states it was a rare occurrence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Even if true wouldnt that contradict your claim that *"No free Black person became a slave."*?
> 
> Your words not mine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *He* was kipnapped so 100,000,000 Blacks who aren’t descendants of slaves should receive reparations.
> Now please find a Link showing millions of Blacks were kidnapped into slavery.
Click to expand...


Millions of blacks may not have been kidnapped into slavery, but he's certainly shown evidence that at least some were, which does contradict your claim that no free black person became a slave.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do we "know" this. And who are the "NA"?
> 
> 
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you claim that things are recorded aren't always true, then rely on Columbus' journal ( a recording) to bolster you claim t hat blacks were here in North America before Columbus got here, even though he never set foot on American Soil?
> 
> Do you realize how asinine  that is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you pretty confident that Diego Columbus brought slaves to North America?  Because he didn't, the closest he ever got was Santo Domingo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said Diego brought slaves to N. America but you do realize Santa Domingo is in N.America right?
> 
> https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/capitals-of-north-america.html
Click to expand...


Neither Santo Domingo Venezuela nor Santo Doming Dominican Republic are in North America.

Jesus Christ.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. People suffer from mental illness all the time. That doesnt mean I believe in racism towards mentally ill people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
Click to expand...


Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.

Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.

I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> 
> 
> Uh huh.
> Because Columbus bought and sold millions of African slaves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Columbus had never been to N. America so where did the Africans come from prior to his arrival?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And if they were?
> BFD.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now youre angry because I proved your comment was lie?  Dont be like that. Get a better argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you spend all day convincing yourself that you have any idea of what’s going on?
Click to expand...


Well, to use his term, I'm_ fairly confident _of that.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
Click to expand...


How exactly does on point someone's race on an internet forum?


----------



## Montrovant

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you claim that things are recorded aren't always true, then rely on Columbus' journal ( a recording) to bolster you claim t hat blacks were here in North America before Columbus got here, even though he never set foot on American Soil?
> 
> Do you realize how asinine  that is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you pretty confident that Diego Columbus brought slaves to North America?  Because he didn't, the closest he ever got was Santo Domingo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said Diego brought slaves to N. America but you do realize Santa Domingo is in N.America right?
> 
> https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/capitals-of-north-america.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither Santo Domingo Venezuela nor Santo Doming Dominican Republic are in North America.
> 
> Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...


The Dominican Republic is considered part of North America.  All of Central America is.  Central America


----------



## Indeependent

Montrovant said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> 
> 
> You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it.  Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I saw the movie.
> The movie states it was a rare occurrence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Even if true wouldnt that contradict your claim that *"No free Black person became a slave."*?
> 
> Your words not mine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *He* was kipnapped so 100,000,000 Blacks who aren’t descendants of slaves should receive reparations.
> Now please find a Link showing millions of Blacks were kidnapped into slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Millions of blacks may not have been kidnapped into slavery, but he's certainly shown evidence that at least some were, which does contradict your claim that no free black person became a slave.
Click to expand...

We just have to know who did and why their descendants 200 years later still can’t stabalize a community.
I have no sympathy for people who have been receiving welfare for decades not getting their act together.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Montrovant said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, you claim that things are recorded aren't always true, then rely on Columbus' journal ( a recording) to bolster you claim t hat blacks were here in North America before Columbus got here, even though he never set foot on American Soil?
> 
> Do you realize how asinine  that is?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you pretty confident that Diego Columbus brought slaves to North America?  Because he didn't, the closest he ever got was Santo Domingo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said Diego brought slaves to N. America but you do realize Santa Domingo is in N.America right?
> 
> https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/capitals-of-north-america.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither Santo Domingo Venezuela nor Santo Doming Dominican Republic are in North America.
> 
> Jesus Christ.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Dominican Republic is considered part of North America.  All of Central America is.  Central America
Click to expand...


The Dominican Republic is part of the Greater Antilles and Venezuela is in South America.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Montrovant said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, you claim that things are recorded aren't always true, then rely on Columbus' journal ( a recording) to bolster you claim t hat blacks were here in North America before Columbus got here, even though he never set foot on American Soil?
> 
> Do you realize how asinine  that is?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you pretty confident that Diego Columbus brought slaves to North America?  Because he didn't, the closest he ever got was Santo Domingo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said Diego brought slaves to N. America but you do realize Santa Domingo is in N.America right?
> 
> https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/capitals-of-north-america.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither Santo Domingo Venezuela nor Santo Doming Dominican Republic are in North America.
> 
> Jesus Christ.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Dominican Republic is considered part of North America.  All of Central America is.  Central America
Click to expand...


I stand corrected, regarding the Dominican Republic.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> In your case maybe you dont know. You are an idiot that cant read well.  Have someone help you read columbus journal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you claim that things are recorded aren't always true, then rely on Columbus' journal ( a recording) to bolster you claim t hat blacks were here in North America before Columbus got here, even though he never set foot on American Soil?
> 
> Do you realize how asinine  that is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you pretty confident that Diego Columbus brought slaves to North America?  Because he didn't, the closest he ever got was Santo Domingo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said Diego brought slaves to N. America but you do realize Santa Domingo is in N.America right?
> 
> https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/capitals-of-north-america.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither Santo Domingo Venezuela nor Santo Doming Dominican Republic are in North America.
> 
> Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...

Your stupidity Is mind boggling in its ability to negate anything you say.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> People do suffer from mental illness all the time...but not as a race.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
Click to expand...


I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."  

Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.


----------



## Indeependent

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you pretty confident that Diego Columbus brought slaves to North America?  Because he didn't, the closest he ever got was Santo Domingo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said Diego brought slaves to N. America but you do realize Santa Domingo is in N.America right?
> 
> https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/capitals-of-north-america.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither Santo Domingo Venezuela nor Santo Doming Dominican Republic are in North America.
> 
> Jesus Christ.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Dominican Republic is considered part of North America.  All of Central America is.  Central America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I stand corrected, regarding the Dominican Republic.
Click to expand...

Liar!!!!


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> He is right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
Click to expand...


Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Asclepias said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, you claim that things are recorded aren't always true, then rely on Columbus' journal ( a recording) to bolster you claim t hat blacks were here in North America before Columbus got here, even though he never set foot on American Soil?
> 
> Do you realize how asinine  that is?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you pretty confident that Diego Columbus brought slaves to North America?  Because he didn't, the closest he ever got was Santo Domingo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said Diego brought slaves to N. America but you do realize Santa Domingo is in N.America right?
> 
> https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/capitals-of-north-america.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither Santo Domingo Venezuela nor Santo Doming Dominican Republic are in North America.
> 
> Jesus Christ.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your stupidity Is mind boggling in its ability to negate anything you say.
Click to expand...


I corrected myself regarding the Dominican Republic, but unless you have some map showing the Venezuela is in North America, do share!!


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
Click to expand...


Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule.  Let it go.  You're not entitled to anything more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
Click to expand...


Better talk with A because he is fairly confident that a lot of what is document isn't true.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just refuse to believe anything but what you want to believe. You do understand that racism is an abusive behavior don't you?
> 
> How Slavery’s Legacy Affects the Mental Health of Black Americans
> 
> How the legacy of slavery affects the mental health of black Americans today
> 
> The Effects of Slavery within the African-American Community
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
Click to expand...


Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.


----------



## Indeependent

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
Click to expand...

Butt, butt, butt, butt, butt, butt...it never happened!


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.
Click to expand...

Decades of welfare and food stamps  and you still can’t get your act together.


----------



## Indeependent

I want restitution from every Black who has ever received public assistance.


----------



## Unkotare

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billyboom said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> So selling family members is OK.
> Uh huh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, breaking up families is ok?
> Uh huh.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trespassers?
> Yes.
> And families are broken up all the time by our *legal* system.
> Now back to *selling* family members...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is nothing to go back to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are free to return to Afica and get your reparations from Bill Gates.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am free to be in America right now talking about the money we are owed. ....
Click to expand...



You will be given every penny YOU are owed, Prime Time. That comes to $0.00.  Don’t spend it all at once.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
Click to expand...


Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> I want restitution from every Black who has ever received public assistance.



Another dumb comment.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Better talk with A because he is fairly confident that a lot of what is document isn't true.
Click to expand...


No, I am talking to you because A knows the facts.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
Click to expand...


Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Better talk with A because he is fairly confident that a lot of what is document isn't true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I am talking to you because A knows the facts.
Click to expand...


No, he's _fairly confident.... _there is nothing factual about_ fairly confident._


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Decades of welfare and food stamps  and you still can’t get your act together.
Click to expand...


As compared to almost 2.5 centuries of getting government assistance like whites have?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Decades of welfare and food stamps  and you still can’t get your act together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As compared to almost 2.5 centuries of getting government assistance like whites have?
Click to expand...


We get government assistance?  Do tell!!


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
Click to expand...


I have.

"The vast majority of those who were enslaved and transported in the transatlantic slave trade were Africans from central and western Africa, who had been sold by other West Africans to Western European slave traders (with a small number being captured directly by the slave traders in coastal raids), who brought them to the Americas."

Atlantic slave trade - Wikipedia


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want restitution from every Black who has ever received public assistance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
Click to expand...

Why?
Blacks get my tax dollars for decades and use it at the bar and to buy knives and guns and you want another income stream?


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> 
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
Click to expand...


That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Better talk with A because he is fairly confident that a lot of what is document isn't true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, I am talking to you because A knows the facts.
Click to expand...

Artifacts.
If you guys are the result of a Public School education, it’s time to shut off the taxes I pay.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
Click to expand...


Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> 
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have.
> 
> "The vast majority of those who were enslaved and transported in the transatlantic slave trade were Africans from central and western Africa, who had been sold by other West Africans to Western European slave traders (with a small number being captured directly by the slave traders in coastal raids), who brought them to the Americas."
> 
> Atlantic slave trade - Wikipedia
Click to expand...


No you haven't.


----------



## Indeependent

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
Click to expand...

These guys consider themselves educated?
God help us.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have.
> 
> "The vast majority of those who were enslaved and transported in the transatlantic slave trade were Africans from central and western Africa, who had been sold by other West Africans to Western European slave traders (with a small number being captured directly by the slave traders in coastal raids), who brought them to the Americas."
> 
> Atlantic slave trade - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you haven't.
Click to expand...

Because...Whitey!!!


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want restitution from every Black who has ever received public assistance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?
> Blacks get my tax dollars for decades and use it at the bar and to buy knives and guns and you want another income stream?
Click to expand...


Another dumb comment.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have.
> 
> "The vast majority of those who were enslaved and transported in the transatlantic slave trade were Africans from central and western Africa, who had been sold by other West Africans to Western European slave traders (with a small number being captured directly by the slave traders in coastal raids), who brought them to the Americas."
> 
> Atlantic slave trade - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you haven't.
Click to expand...


Whatthefuckever.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want restitution from every Black who has ever received public assistance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?
> Blacks get my tax dollars for decades and use it at the bar and to buy knives and guns and you want another income stream?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
Click to expand...

You got your education from Community Meetings and Black websites and you’re calling *me* dumb?


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want restitution from every Black who has ever received public assistance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?
> Blacks get my tax dollars for decades and use it at the bar and to buy knives and guns and you want another income stream?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You got your education from Community Meetings and Black websites and you’re calling *me* dumb?
Click to expand...


Have you ever met an intelligent racist?  Those two are two of the biggest racists on this board.


----------



## Indeependent

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want restitution from every Black who has ever received public assistance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?
> Blacks get my tax dollars for decades and use it at the bar and to buy knives and guns and you want another income stream?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You got your education from Community Meetings and Black websites and you’re calling *me* dumb?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Have you ever met an intelligent racist?  Those two are two of the biggest racists on this board.
Click to expand...

I never met White trash who wanted Reparations.


----------



## MizMolly

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.
Click to expand...

You dont know which blacks would have spent their income wisely to leave any wealth behind. While slavery was wrong, had the slaves been paid, Why do you think they would have had wealth? They would have had to pay bills like everyone else. Not all whites were left riches from their ancestors.


----------



## IM2

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
Click to expand...


We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery? 

So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
Click to expand...

Bull...
You’ve accomplished nothing with 50 years of public handouts.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bull...
> You’ve accomplished nothing with 50 years of public handouts.
Click to expand...


Another dumb comment.

Exactly what public handouts have been given exclusively to blacks?


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want restitution from every Black who has ever received public assistance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?
> Blacks get my tax dollars for decades and use it at the bar and to buy knives and guns and you want another income stream?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You got your education from Community Meetings and Black websites and you’re calling *me* dumb?
Click to expand...


Actually I have a bachelors and masters degree. Whites are not really known for historical accuracy son.


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bull...
> You’ve accomplished nothing with 50 years of public handouts.
Click to expand...


_*RACE - The Power of an Illusion*_
*BACKGROUND:*

*A Long History of Affirmative Action - For Whites*

Many middle-class white people, especially those of us from the suburbs, like to think that we got to where we are today by virtue of our merit - hard work, intelligence, pluck, and maybe a little luck. And while we may be sympathetic to the plight of others, we close down when we hear the words "affirmative action" or "racial preferences." We worked hard, we made it on our own, the thinking goes, why don't 'they'? After all, the Civil Rights Act was enacted almost 40 years ago.

What we don't readily acknowledge is that racial preferences have a long, institutional history in this country - a white history. Here are a few ways in which government programs and practices have channeled wealth and opportunities to white people at the expense of others.

*
Early Racial Preferences*

We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their support and their policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.

White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white, under Homestead Act provisions.

The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not others. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land. Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.

In the South, the federal government never followed through on General Sherman's Civil War plan to divide up plantations and give each freed slave "40 acres and a mule" as reparations. Only once was monetary compensation made for slavery, in Washington, D.C. There, government officials paid up to $300 per slave upon emancipation - not to the slaves, but to local slaveholders as compensation for loss of property.

When slavery ended, its legacy lived on not only in the impoverished condition of Black people but in the wealth and prosperity that accrued to white slaveowners and their descendents. Economists who try to place a dollar value on how much white Americans have profited from 200 years of unpaid slave labor, including interest, begin their estimates at $1 trillion.

Jim Crow laws, instituted in the late 19th and early 20th century and not overturned in many states until the 1960s, reserved the best jobs, neighborhoods, schools and hospitals for white people.


*The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation*

Less known are more recent government racial preferences, first enacted during the New Deal, that directed wealth to white families and continue to shape life opportunities and chances.

The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian. As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement. They couldn't pass wealth on to their children. Just the opposite. Their children had to support them.

Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft unions remained nearly all-white well into the 1970s. In 1972, for example, every single one of the 3,000 members of Los Angeles Steam Fitters Local #250 was still white.

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites. Of the 350,000 new homes built with federal support in northern California between 1946 and 1960, fewer than 100 went to African Americans.

These government programs made possible the new segregated white suburbs that sprang up around the country after World War II. Government subsidies for municipal services helped develop and enhance these suburbs further, in turn fueling commercial investments. Freeways tied the new suburbs to central business districts, but they often cut through and destroyed the vitality of non-white neighborhoods in the central city.

Today, Black and Latino mortgage applicants are still 60% more likely than whites to be turned down for a loan, even after controlling for employment, financial, and neighborhood factors. According to the Census, whites are more likely to be segregated than any other group. As recently as 1993, 86% of suburban whites still lived in neighborhoods with a black population of less than 1%.


*Reaping the Rewards of Racial Preference*

One result of the generations of preferential treatment for whites is that a typical white family today has on average eight times the assets, or net worth, of a typical African American family, according to economist Edward Wolff. Even when families of the same income are compared, white families have more than twice the wealth of Black families. Much of that wealth difference can be attributed to the value of one's home, and how much one inherited from parents.

But a family's net worth is not simply the finish line, it's also the starting point for the next generation. Those with wealth pass their assets on to their children - by financing a college education, lending a hand during hard times, or assisting with the down payment for a home. Some economists estimate that up to 80 percent of lifetime wealth accumulation depends on these intergenerational transfers. White advantage is passed down, from parent to child to grand-child. As a result, the racial wealth gap - and the head start enjoyed by whites - appears to have grown since the civil rights days.

In 1865, just after Emancipation, it is not surprising that African Americans owned 0.5 percent of the total worth of the United States. But by 1990, a full 135 years after the abolition of slavery, Black Americans still possessed only a meager 1 percent of national wealth.


Rather than recognize how "racial preferences" have tilted the playing field and given us a head start in life, many whites continue to believe that race does not affect our lives. Instead, we chastise others for not achieving what we have; we even invert the situation and accuse non-whites of using "the race card" to advance themselves.

Or we suggest that differential outcomes may simply result from differences in "natural" ability or motivation. However, sociologist Dalton Conley's research shows that when we compare the performance of families across racial lines who make not just the same income, but also hold similar net worth, a very interesting thing happens: many of the racial disparities in education, graduation rates, welfare usage and other outcomes disappear. The "performance gap" between whites and nonwhites is a product not of nature, but unequal circumstances.

Colorblind policies that treat everyone the same, no exceptions for minorities, are often counter-posed against affirmative action. But colorblindness today merely bolsters the unfair advantages that color-coded practices have enabled white Americans to long accumulate.

RACE - The Power of an Illusion | White Advantage

*Talk to me when blacks get the same 300 years worth of handouts whites have.*


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with a race suffering from mental illness?  You are aware, I hope, that not all blacks are American?
> 
> Perhaps Asclepias meant that white Americans have mental issues, rather than all whites (which I still feel is ridiculous, but at least a bit less so).  I went with what was actually said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.
Click to expand...


You did not miss 200 plus years of income because you were enslaved.  That means that it is indirect.  Again, it doesn't mean it is invalid, just indirect.

Also, to clarify: By whites here, are you talking about in the US, or just on USMB?


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
Click to expand...


You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.  

I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but we got back up from the son of Columbus as well. I take notes in a journal more seriously than some trumped story years later.  Ha trumped up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you pretty confident that Diego Columbus brought slaves to North America?  Because he didn't, the closest he ever got was Santo Domingo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said Diego brought slaves to N. America but you do realize Santa Domingo is in N.America right?
> 
> https://www.countries-ofthe-world.com/capitals-of-north-america.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither Santo Domingo Venezuela nor Santo Doming Dominican Republic are in North America.
> 
> Jesus Christ.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your stupidity Is mind boggling in its ability to negate anything you say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I corrected myself regarding the Dominican Republic, but unless you have some map showing the Venezuela is in North America, do share!!
Click to expand...

No one mentioned Venezuela but you dummy.  Try something else to alleve your embarrassment.


----------



## Asclepias

Soggy in NOLA said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually that did not happen.
> 
> The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’
> 
> *Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as **Barton Myers reports** — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.
> *
> The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross
> 
> *And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.
> *
> Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.
> 
> 
> 
> You *do* realize that some Blacks came here on their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh!
> No free Black person became a slave.
> Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, it is documented fact that blacks did not sell family members. And is it legal fact that those Africans are not responsible for what whites did on these shores. African law did not apply here. America was not an African colony. African governments did not make slavery legal in America. Africans did not work blacks in America without pay for 223 years. Whites did this. Accept the truth and stop making shit up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Better talk with A because he is fairly confident that a lot of what is document isn't true.
Click to expand...

Anything whites document that puts themselves in a good light and Blacks in a bad light is hardly ever true.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Decades of welfare and food stamps  and you still can’t get your act together.
Click to expand...

We need centuries of AA and handouts just like whites had.


----------



## Asclepias

MizMolly said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You dont know which blacks would have spent their income wisely to leave any wealth behind. While slavery was wrong, had the slaves been paid, Why do you think they would have had wealth? They would have had to pay bills like everyone else. Not all whites were left riches from their ancestors.
Click to expand...

You dont have to know.  The point is they never got the opportunity.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you damn sure don't want to  discuss the psychological impact of slavery and colonization on those blacks who are not American. Montrovant you simply are not educated enough on these matters try to instruct me about issues such as this. Learn to listen, that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here. A is correct and the accuracy in his comments are apparent in places like this. You are white and you just don't want to see the problem of people denying reality to such an extent they actually argue against documented fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You did not miss 200 plus years of income because you were enslaved.  That means that it is indirect.  Again, it doesn't mean it is invalid, just indirect.
> 
> Also, to clarify: By whites here, are you talking about in the US, or just on USMB?
Click to expand...


You aren't that dumb so I don't need to clarify what was said.. We can draw the line to slavery as it pertains to our economic condition today. So it's really not indirect.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.
> 
> I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.
Click to expand...


It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.


----------



## Indeependent

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bull...
> You’ve accomplished nothing with 50 years of public handouts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Exactly what public handouts have been given exclusively to blacks?
Click to expand...

What do non-Whites do with public handouts?
They buy food, not guns and knives.
They don’t lease BMWs.
They don’t do the bar every night.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does the psychological impact of slavery have to do with claiming all US whites have cognitive dissonance regarding reparations?
> 
> And here you go again generalizing whites, and assuming I am white.
> 
> What documented fact are you talking about?  Are you saying that all blacks suffer from mental illness due to slavery and that is a documented fact?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Decades of welfare and food stamps  and you still can’t get your act together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We need centuries of AA and handouts just like whites had.
Click to expand...

Centuries?
Elaborate.


----------



## Asclepias

Indeependent said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument is made by whites.  And generally when someone is white in one of these forums and a person points that out, the first thing they try saying is how a person is assuming they are white.
> 
> Again, when you learn that a comment that has the word whites in it doesn't mean all whites hen you will be able to participate in these discussions more effectively. Blacks, and that does not mean all blacks, do suffer from mental issues due to slavery. That's not me making that comment. You were provided links that you obviously did not read from others who have done more extensive study on this matter than I and most certainly you have.
> 
> I think A explained his position clearly and looking at the conversation here and in any similar primarily white forum where this has been discussed, A is correct in his assessment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I understand perfectly well that whites doesn't necessarily mean all whites.  I also understand that you often like to generalize when talking about whites.  In this particular case, you said "that's the major problem whites seem to have and more specifically whites here."
> 
> Anyone suffering mental issues from slavery today is doing so indirectly (other than any exceptions who may have actually been enslaved).  That does not invalidate their suffering, but it might make it difficult to prove when discussing reparations for slavery.  It also is not contradicting my point that ascribing cognitive dissonance to all whites in the US is asinine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because that's the general problem whites have, more specifically whites here.  Montrovant we missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. We are not indirectly affect by this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Decades of welfare and food stamps  and you still can’t get your act together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We need centuries of AA and handouts just like whites had.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Centuries?
> Elaborate.
Click to expand...

What do you need to know?  I am assuming you are aware that white people had AA from the moment this nation was formed right?


----------



## IM2

Indeependent said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bull...
> You’ve accomplished nothing with 50 years of public handouts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Exactly what public handouts have been given exclusively to blacks?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What do non-Whites do with public handouts?
> They buy food, not guns and knives.
> They don’t lease BMWs.
> They don’t do the bar every night.
Click to expand...


Exactly what public handouts have been given exclusively to blacks?

That's the question you were asked. No one asked for your racist opinion.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.
> 
> I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.
Click to expand...


WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?

Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?

Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.
> 
> I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?
> 
> Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?
> 
> Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.
Click to expand...

I dont think you quite get the point. No one cares what some random racist white boy thinks or even the majority. Money/economic power is what enabled Blacks to build thriving communities.  I dont give shit about what some white boy thinks of my lifestyle. I'm going to do me and teach other Blacks how its done. Economic power is the tool we would use to level the playing field.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Coyote said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Truth is, reparations were already provided for freed slaves immediately following the conclusion of the Civil War.  A large swath of real estate was confiscated from Southern landowners and earmarked for distribution to any freed slave who applied for a designated portion thereof.  The apportioned land, and subsequent mule, was intended for the freed slave to establish himself and provide for his family.  So, the opportunity for economic stability was available.  Since the original freed slaves were already provided opportunity to claim some portion of real property "provided" by those assumed to have owned slaves, there is no need to pay descendants of slaves any amount of money, regardless of source.
> 
> _"Today, we commonly use the phrase "40 acres and a mule," but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: "The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States."
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: " … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such."
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: " … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title."
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — "a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John's River in Florida, including Georgia's Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast," as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves. The extent of this Order and its larger implications are mind-boggling, actually."
> https://www.theroot.com/the-truth-behind-40-acres-and-a-mule-1790894780_
> 
> 
> 
> The one problem with that is in reality very few got the acres and mules in the end.
Click to expand...

The offer was there and available to any who would claim it.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Truth is, reparations were already provided for freed slaves immediately following the conclusion of the Civil War.  A large swath of real estate was confiscated from Southern landowners and earmarked for distribution to any freed slave who applied for a designated portion thereof.  The apportioned land, and subsequent mule, was intended for the freed slave to establish himself and provide for his family.  So, the opportunity for economic stability was available.  Since the original freed slaves were already provided opportunity to claim some portion of real property "provided" by those assumed to have owned slaves, there is no need to pay descendants of slaves any amount of money, regardless of source.
> 
> _"Today, we commonly use the phrase "40 acres and a mule," but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: "The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States."
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: " … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such."
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: " … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title."
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — "a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John's River in Florida, including Georgia's Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast," as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves. The extent of this Order and its larger implications are mind-boggling, actually."
> https://www.theroot.com/the-truth-behind-40-acres-and-a-mule-1790894780_
> 
> 
> 
> The one problem with that is in reality very few got the acres and mules in the end.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The offer was there and available to any who would claim it.
Click to expand...

Many claimed it but it was stolen later by whites.  Specifically Johnson who rescinded the order made by Sherman. Kind of helps to know your history before making claims you obviously have no knowledge about.

Forty Acres and a Mule | The Black Past: Remembered and Reclaimed

*"Less than a year after Sherman’s order, President Andrew Johnson intervened, and ordered that the vast majority of confiscated land be returned to its former owners.  This included most of land that the freedmen had settled.  The Federal government dispossessed tens of thousands of black landholders.  In Georgia and South Carolina, some blacks fought back, driving away former owners with guns.  Federal troops sometimes evicted blacks by force.  In the end only some 2,000 blacks retained land they had won and worked after the war."*


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
Click to expand...

So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most whites aren't millionaires, either.  So you have some point?  Are you suggesting that the US taxpayer be dunned to make instant millionaires out of the previously identified group of blacks?  Before blacks were brought to this country as slaves, Native Americans were used as slave labor.  Any suggestions?  (Blacks were considered superior slaves because Native Americans were more likely to let themselves die than be chattel labor or be denied their freedom.)
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Herein lies the crux of our dispute: Two specific problems I can see with your proposal to dun modern day taxpayers: Millions of people today who were not participants in nor responsible for the actions of thie government at a time when slavery was an acceptable practice worldwide.  (Slavery is still rampant in some places on this planet, even to this day.)  The same government that worked to criminalize and eliminate the practice of slavery, even to the point of destroying the nation through armed conflict, if necessary.  Do you disregard the lives of whites sacrificed in the bid to eliminate slavery and negate their sacrifices?
> The second is:  you are not asking for fair and equitable payments made by the descendants of those who owned slaves to those descendants of slaves held in this country.  What you are asking for is a big KaChing! payout funded by big government coffers filled by totally innocent persons in sums to be determined by anyone "qualified" for retribution for a condition that ceased to exist, legally, in this country well over 100 years ago.  Even if it were equitable for the sons to pay for the sins of their fathers, where is there any justification to force payment for anyone's sins by the innocent?
> I am sorry if your great- or great-great-grandparents suffered slavery.  But I will offer no personal apology because my forebears played no part in holding or trading slaves.
> But supposing such reparations were to be paid to qualified persons, please explain how you believe that money would serve to improve the economy of the black community?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
Click to expand...

That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think you severely underate human nature here.  People are individuals first.  That is why communism was such a flop, it ignored the "what is in it for me" aspect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No. People (at least Black people) are by nature social animals. They go crazy without human companionship.  Thats why solitary confinement is used as a punishment.  Like I was saying. Its not like we are guessing about this. We have proof because we did it in the past.
> 
> https://www.theroot.com/the-other-black-wall-streets-1823010812
> 
> 
> Communism was massively successful. Its the basis of the first civilizations.  Without it the human species would not have survived.
Click to expand...

_All_ normal people, black or otherwise, are social animals.  But they also tend to be fiercely tribal and insular to a specific group.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
Click to expand...

Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> 
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think you severely underate human nature here.  People are individuals first.  That is why communism was such a flop, it ignored the "what is in it for me" aspect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No. People (at least Black people) are by nature social animals. They go crazy without human companionship.  Thats why solitary confinement is used as a punishment.  Like I was saying. Its not like we are guessing about this. We have proof because we did it in the past.
> 
> https://www.theroot.com/the-other-black-wall-streets-1823010812
> 
> 
> Communism was massively successful. Its the basis of the first civilizations.  Without it the human species would not have survived.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _All_ normal people, black or otherwise, are social animals.  But they also tend to be fiercely tribal and insular to a specific group.
Click to expand...

Not sure how that means communism was a failure but OK.


----------



## Toro

Is this stupid thread _still_ going on?


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is what I wrote. If most Blacks are millionaires then the economic wealth gap whites enjoy goes away.
> No. I am suggesting the US pay what is owed to the descendants of those enslaved due to the US allowing chattel slavery. Isnt that what we are talking about?
> Not all Native Americans were Black so I dont understand the deflection?
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter if modern day people are responsible or not. Again its the US's debt to pay and they pay that with tax dollars.  Slavery existing or having existed elsewhere has absolutely nothing to do with this. The US didnt go to war to end slavery. It went to war to keep the south from leaving. We know this because the enslaved were not freed in the Union states until later.
> 
> *Its our right to go after direct descendants at a later date and time we determine. Whites dont dictate to us when and in what order we should sue for reparations.*
> 
> The justification is that they are part of the US that benefited from and legalized chattel slavery.
> 
> You dont have to offer any apology. Any apology would be hollow and condescending in light of the economic gap that you dont want to address and refuse to believe in.
> 
> That money would instantly close the economic gap if paid. Not only that it could go to fund Black K-12 schools and bolster the HBCU's currently in existence.  Basically it would be another Black Wall Street before jealous whites burned it to the ground. If you need to understand how money can change a community look at the history of Black Wall Street and other like Black communities before whites destroyed them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
Click to expand...


No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.


----------



## IM2

gallantwarrior said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Truth is, reparations were already provided for freed slaves immediately following the conclusion of the Civil War.  A large swath of real estate was confiscated from Southern landowners and earmarked for distribution to any freed slave who applied for a designated portion thereof.  The apportioned land, and subsequent mule, was intended for the freed slave to establish himself and provide for his family.  So, the opportunity for economic stability was available.  Since the original freed slaves were already provided opportunity to claim some portion of real property "provided" by those assumed to have owned slaves, there is no need to pay descendants of slaves any amount of money, regardless of source.
> 
> _"Today, we commonly use the phrase "40 acres and a mule," but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: "The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States."
> 
> Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: " … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such."
> 
> Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: " … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title."
> 
> With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — "a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John's River in Florida, including Georgia's Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast," as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves. The extent of this Order and its larger implications are mind-boggling, actually."
> https://www.theroot.com/the-truth-behind-40-acres-and-a-mule-1790894780_
> 
> 
> 
> The one problem with that is in reality very few got the acres and mules in the end.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The offer was there and available to any who would claim it.
Click to expand...


Why do some of you whites feel so inclined make shit up? Gallantwarrior is a liar and it's proven by the statement below.

*And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln's successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, "returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it" — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.* 

https://www.theroot.com/the-truth-behind-40-acres-and-a-mule-1790894780


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
Click to expand...

Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
Click to expand...

Then we agree on this point, also.  I much prefer spending my money where I live than supporting Amazon and similar entities.  I don't much care who owns, runs, or is employed by a business, as long as I obtain the best service and value for my hard-earned dollar.  Up here, building and supporting Native Alaskan communities is a priority among many who live in those communities.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.
> 
> I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?
> 
> Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?
> 
> Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.
Click to expand...



I read what you posted. Why wouldn't I? Wages would have made a difference and it gets old being told by whites that everything you say can't be only because they think it can't be.


----------



## IM2

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> 
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier. * Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage*.
Click to expand...


The same can be said to whites living in white communities that only utilize white businesses.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.
> 
> I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?
> 
> Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?
> 
> Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont think you quite get the point. No one cares what some random racist white boy thinks or even the majority. Money/economic power is what enabled Blacks to build thriving communities.  I dont give shit about what some white boy thinks of my lifestyle. I'm going to do me and teach other Blacks how its done. Economic power is the tool we would use to level the playing field.
Click to expand...


I honestly do not understand why you or IM2 are arguing with me on this.  My point is that, even if slaves in the US had been paid wages, the legal and social barriers still existed to prevent many or most of them from realizing economic success.  I'm not saying it wouldn't have helped, I'm pointing out that when someone is limited in where they can live, work, what they can purchase and where, or who they can associate with based on their skin color, even having money may not be enough.

Arguing with me here seems to be saying that the racist laws and attitudes of the past were not that significant of factors in holding back the advancement and success of blacks; instead, the real factor keeping blacks down has been a lack of capital.  That is an...unusual take.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you think it would be reinvested into
> So people should be forced to pay for the crimes of their forbears?
> 
> In your last paragraph why do you think reparations would go to any of that?   Look at what happens with the typical lottery winner.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
Click to expand...


That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.  

There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.
> 
> I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?
> 
> Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?
> 
> Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I read what you posted. Why wouldn't I? Wages would have made a difference and it gets old being told by whites that everything you say can't be only because they think it can't be.
Click to expand...


Certainly wages would have made a difference, but how much of one, in the face of racist laws and racist attitudes by a large portion of the majority?  I'm not saying wages would have been meaningless, I'm just questioning whether they could have overcome the other factors involved.  

There's also the question of just what the wages would have entailed, but that's a separate issue in large part.

Oh, and I didn't say anything "can't be."  You do that a lot, though, telling people the way things are, that they don't know what they are talking about, can't know this or that, etc.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier. * Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The same can be said to whites living in white communities that only utilize white businesses.
Click to expand...


Yep, the same could be said of anyone living in a community made up primarily of a particular race.

I've never used or purchased from a business, or not done so, based on the race of the owner(s).  The vast majority of the time, I have no clue who owns a business I deal with, let alone their race.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.
> 
> I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?
> 
> Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?
> 
> Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont think you quite get the point. No one cares what some random racist white boy thinks or even the majority. Money/economic power is what enabled Blacks to build thriving communities.  I dont give shit about what some white boy thinks of my lifestyle. I'm going to do me and teach other Blacks how its done. Economic power is the tool we would use to level the playing field.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I honestly do not understand why you or IM2 are arguing with me on this.  My point is that, even if slaves in the US had been paid wages, the legal and social barriers still existed to prevent many or most of them from realizing economic success.  I'm not saying it wouldn't have helped, I'm pointing out that when someone is limited in where they can live, work, what they can purchase and where, or who they can associate with based on their skin color, even having money may not be enough.
> 
> Arguing with me here seems to be saying that the racist laws and attitudes of the past were not that significant of factors in holding back the advancement and success of blacks; instead, the real factor keeping blacks down has been a lack of capital.  That is an...unusual take.
Click to expand...


It was both, and the fact that laws were made so blacks could not earn money seems to be part of he equation you miss. Why is it that whites want to always try telling us about these things? In order for a person to have earned an income it would have meant that whites did not consider blacks as property but as humans. That's a change in attitude that would have existed.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
Click to expand...


Actually building the black communiy is fighting racism because of the opportunities that open up for blacks if these communities are fully developed.


----------



## Unkotare

IM2 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want restitution from every Black who has ever received public assistance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?
> Blacks get my tax dollars for decades and use it at the bar and to buy knives and guns and you want another income stream?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another dumb comment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You got your education from Community Meetings and Black websites and you’re calling *me* dumb?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually I have a bachelors and masters degree......
Click to expand...





You've mentioned that before, Prime Time.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> 
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually building the black communiy is fighting racism because of the opportunities that open up for blacks if these communities are fully developed.
Click to expand...


By fighting racism, do you mean fighting the affect of racism on blacks?  I think there may be a bit of a definition disconnect here, once again.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.
> 
> I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?
> 
> Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?
> 
> Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont think you quite get the point. No one cares what some random racist white boy thinks or even the majority. Money/economic power is what enabled Blacks to build thriving communities.  I dont give shit about what some white boy thinks of my lifestyle. I'm going to do me and teach other Blacks how its done. Economic power is the tool we would use to level the playing field.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I honestly do not understand why you or IM2 are arguing with me on this.  My point is that, even if slaves in the US had been paid wages, the legal and social barriers still existed to prevent many or most of them from realizing economic success.  I'm not saying it wouldn't have helped, I'm pointing out that when someone is limited in where they can live, work, what they can purchase and where, or who they can associate with based on their skin color, even having money may not be enough.
> 
> Arguing with me here seems to be saying that the racist laws and attitudes of the past were not that significant of factors in holding back the advancement and success of blacks; instead, the real factor keeping blacks down has been a lack of capital.  That is an...unusual take.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was both, and the fact that laws were made so blacks could not earn money seems to be part of he equation you miss. Why is it that whites want to always try telling us about these things? In order for a person to have earned an income it would have meant that whites did not consider blacks as property but as humans. That's a change in attitude that would have existed.
Click to expand...


There's certainly an interconnection involved.  If the point is that wages being paid also would include a lack of racist laws and attitudes, that's a different proposition.  Of course if wages had been paid to slaves, and if the laws were not oppressive, and if the populace at large had a less denigrating opinion of those who were slaves, things would be different.  The way it's been presented in recent posts, it sounded as if the big issue that caused problems was simply money, separate from the other issues.

Whites constantly want to try telling blacks about what things?  The way blacks were mistreated and oppressed?  I thought whites wanted to ignore those things or pretend they didn't happen?


----------



## gallantwarrior

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> 
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier. * Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The same can be said to whites living in white communities that only utilize white businesses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep, the same could be said of anyone living in a community made up primarily of a particular race.
> 
> I've never used or purchased from a business, or not done so, based on the race of the owner(s).  The vast majority of the time, I have no clue who owns a business I deal with, let alone their race.
Click to expand...

Nor do I care what race, or other PC identifier, the owner or employees of a business may claim.  I confess I try to do as much business locally as possible in an attempt to support my community.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.
> 
> I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?
> 
> Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?
> 
> Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I read what you posted. Why wouldn't I? Wages would have made a difference and it gets old being told by whites that everything you say can't be only because they think it can't be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Certainly wages would have made a difference, but how much of one, in the face of racist laws and racist attitudes by a large portion of the majority?  I'm not saying wages would have been meaningless, I'm just questioning whether they could have overcome the other factors involved.
> 
> There's also the question of just what the wages would have entailed, but that's a separate issue in large part.
> 
> Oh, and I didn't say anything "can't be."  You do that a lot, though, telling people the way things are, that they don't know what they are talking about, can't know this or that, etc.
Click to expand...


Yes I do say those things because what is said to me shows this is the case. You white people here aren't arguing this issue based on reality. Reparations have been paid. Like A says, there is precedent for it. You continue paying NA descendants for things that happened before you were born. Some of the people here talk about Africans selling each other as an excuse to oppose reparations but say nothing about the Native Americans who helped whites find others to capture and help whites defeat Native Americans tribes. So when you guys oppose our claims based on these arguments you show the lack of knowledge on the issue from whites here. 

The attitudes of those times aren't relevant here, the fact blacks lost a huge amount of money is. There were the few free blacks then who had businesses. So if all blacks had been able to earn money, or were given headrights and the same economic assistance whites got, things would have been different.

There are things blacks have endured only for being black that whites haven't had to. So how would you know about how it feels or what it can do to a person?  You guys consistently make comments about blacks that I know from being black that just are not so. So that's why I say you don't know what you are talking about. You have questioned everything we have presented as if only your opinion can be correct, when in fact your opinion is the least correct between the 3 of us, meaning A, me and you. So until you and the rest here can understand blacks are fully capable of understanding  and presenting causes and solutions for issues affecting us and that we aren't always challenged with comments about how we don't represent all blacks because we don't have your opinion on issues as if your opinions are the ones most blacks will agree with, or get the 20 questions game you whites don't do to each other on this or anything else  as it pertains to issues confronting blacks, this is what you are going to get from me.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?
> 
> Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?
> 
> Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont think you quite get the point. No one cares what some random racist white boy thinks or even the majority. Money/economic power is what enabled Blacks to build thriving communities.  I dont give shit about what some white boy thinks of my lifestyle. I'm going to do me and teach other Blacks how its done. Economic power is the tool we would use to level the playing field.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I honestly do not understand why you or IM2 are arguing with me on this.  My point is that, even if slaves in the US had been paid wages, the legal and social barriers still existed to prevent many or most of them from realizing economic success.  I'm not saying it wouldn't have helped, I'm pointing out that when someone is limited in where they can live, work, what they can purchase and where, or who they can associate with based on their skin color, even having money may not be enough.
> 
> Arguing with me here seems to be saying that the racist laws and attitudes of the past were not that significant of factors in holding back the advancement and success of blacks; instead, the real factor keeping blacks down has been a lack of capital.  That is an...unusual take.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was both, and the fact that laws were made so blacks could not earn money seems to be part of he equation you miss. Why is it that whites want to always try telling us about these things? In order for a person to have earned an income it would have meant that whites did not consider blacks as property but as humans. That's a change in attitude that would have existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There's certainly an interconnection involved.  If the point is that wages being paid also would include a lack of racist laws and attitudes, that's a different proposition.  Of course if wages had been paid to slaves, and if the laws were not oppressive, and if the populace at large had a less denigrating opinion of those who were slaves, things would be different.  The way it's been presented in recent posts, it sounded as if the big issue that caused problems was simply money, separate from the other issues.
> 
> Whites constantly want to try telling blacks about what things?  The way blacks were mistreated and oppressed?  I thought whites wanted to ignore those things or pretend they didn't happen?
Click to expand...


Montrovant, just as you are trying to tell us about wages being paid including the lack of racist laws, this us an example of how you whites here think you can tell us about everything. You saw what you wanted to see in this because you are looking for reasons to oppose reparations. The reason lost wages was bought up was to allow you to understand why we have a fucking valid case for reparations. The other stuff you present are even further validations of the human rights violations associated with the request for reparations.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

IM2 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why should people who weren't around back then be held responsible for something?  Aren't Africans who enslaved Africans and then sold them into slavery responsible?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you still paying Native Americans for shit you weren't around for? Study how things really happened in Africa in detail for a few years then come back and ask that last question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because I have no say in the matter.  And they are being paid for land mismanagement, not for being NA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's only the Cobell case and those reparations extend from the Dawes Act of the 1800's.  How about the rest of the annual payments to Native American tribes?  And blacks are not asking for reparations for being black.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agreed.. but why do you want to be paid from people that never participated in slavery for something that never happened to you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
Click to expand...


B.S.  My family came here from England in the late 19th century with NOTHING.  And we've all done fairly well.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?
> 
> Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?
> 
> Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think you quite get the point. No one cares what some random racist white boy thinks or even the majority. Money/economic power is what enabled Blacks to build thriving communities.  I dont give shit about what some white boy thinks of my lifestyle. I'm going to do me and teach other Blacks how its done. Economic power is the tool we would use to level the playing field.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I honestly do not understand why you or IM2 are arguing with me on this.  My point is that, even if slaves in the US had been paid wages, the legal and social barriers still existed to prevent many or most of them from realizing economic success.  I'm not saying it wouldn't have helped, I'm pointing out that when someone is limited in where they can live, work, what they can purchase and where, or who they can associate with based on their skin color, even having money may not be enough.
> 
> Arguing with me here seems to be saying that the racist laws and attitudes of the past were not that significant of factors in holding back the advancement and success of blacks; instead, the real factor keeping blacks down has been a lack of capital.  That is an...unusual take.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was both, and the fact that laws were made so blacks could not earn money seems to be part of he equation you miss. Why is it that whites want to always try telling us about these things? In order for a person to have earned an income it would have meant that whites did not consider blacks as property but as humans. That's a change in attitude that would have existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There's certainly an interconnection involved.  If the point is that wages being paid also would include a lack of racist laws and attitudes, that's a different proposition.  Of course if wages had been paid to slaves, and if the laws were not oppressive, and if the populace at large had a less denigrating opinion of those who were slaves, things would be different.  The way it's been presented in recent posts, it sounded as if the big issue that caused problems was simply money, separate from the other issues.
> 
> Whites constantly want to try telling blacks about what things?  The way blacks were mistreated and oppressed?  I thought whites wanted to ignore those things or pretend they didn't happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Montrovant, just as you are trying to tell us about wages being paid including the lack of racist laws, this us an example of how you whites here think you can tell us about everything. You saw what you wanted to see in this because you are looking for reasons to oppose reparations. The reason lost wages was bought up was to allow you to understand why we have a fucking valid case for reparations. The other stuff you present are even further validations of the human rights violations associated with the request for reparations.
Click to expand...


I'm not looking for a reason to oppose reparations for slavery.

All I was doing was pointing out that wages alone likely would not have been enough to allow blacks to have an equal, or even a positive, footing in the country.  You for some reason found that offensive or inaccurate.  You seem to have a habit of taking any sort of disagreement with any point as disagreement with the entirety of your position.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> 
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We missed 200 plus years of income that would have dramatically changed things today for blacks because of slavery. It has happened to us. You benefit from it because of the additional wealth whites have been able to gather during that same time period. There are things resulting from slavery that you guys refuse to consider because whites did not have to live with the negative consequences of not being paid for work for over 200 years. To you guys it's simple.  you were not slaves why are you asking for reparations for slavery?
> 
> So the next time your white ass drives by a black slum, ask yourself, "would this slum exist had blacks been able to earn the trillions they the lost over the 223 years blacks were slaves?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You make it sound as if wages would have made everything better.  The laws and attitudes of the population would still have been a huge problem, wages or not.  You've argued that reparations are about far more than just slavery before and I think it sounds more sensible when taken as that whole.  Couching it in terms of only the wages slaves did not receive isn't nearly as convincing.
> 
> I do understand that this thread is based specifically on slavery and reparations for that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not going to matter what we say to you about this issue. No matter what we show you or the other whites here, you are going to have excuses.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF?  Did you even read what I posted?
> 
> Do you think that if black slaves had been paid wages it would have overcome the racist laws and attitudes of the majority?
> 
> Even when someone agrees with you, you try to make it seem like that person is making some sort of excuse.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont think you quite get the point. No one cares what some random racist white boy thinks or even the majority. Money/economic power is what enabled Blacks to build thriving communities.  I dont give shit about what some white boy thinks of my lifestyle. I'm going to do me and teach other Blacks how its done. Economic power is the tool we would use to level the playing field.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I honestly do not understand why you or IM2 are arguing with me on this.  My point is that, even if slaves in the US had been paid wages, the legal and social barriers still existed to prevent many or most of them from realizing economic success.  I'm not saying it wouldn't have helped, I'm pointing out that when someone is limited in where they can live, work, what they can purchase and where, or who they can associate with based on their skin color, even having money may not be enough.
> 
> Arguing with me here seems to be saying that the racist laws and attitudes of the past were not that significant of factors in holding back the advancement and success of blacks; instead, the real factor keeping blacks down has been a lack of capital.  That is an...unusual take.
Click to expand...

We built thriving communities even with those racist laws and attitudes is what I am trying to point out to you.  *In spite of *all the white AA, *in spite of *all the racist laws, *in spite of *everything whites did to hold us down we still came up to the point they got jealous and burned these communities to the ground. I'm not arguing with you. I am opening your eyes to the fallacy of what you are saying.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they should if they profited from those crimes and others suffered because of those crimes. However, thats not what we are talking about. The US is paying the debt not those individuals.  The US is responsible and complicit in those crimes due to the legalizing of chattel slavery.
> 
> Not sure what lotto winners have to do with my point? I think it would go that way because its been discussed in the Black community and the consensus is exactly what I stated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
Click to expand...

I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.

Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.


----------



## IM2

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> 
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.
> 
> Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.
Click to expand...


Here lies the problem with whites. The never ending excuses. You can convince people not to support racism. Whites were convinced to be racists. If you read Lerone Bennetts  "The Road Not Taken", you see how whites were convinced to support racsim. In the same way, they can be unconvinced.


----------



## IM2

Against the deliberate evasion and enshrouding of the truth, Lerone Bennett, Jr. was among the first scholars to survey Black history and lay bare the roots of racism. This Black historian and longtime editor of Ebony magazine spent a lifetime fighting the racist rewrite of history. In his landmark The Shaping of Black America, he wrote:

In the beginning, as we have seen, there was no race problem in America. The race problem in America was a deliberate invention of men who systematically separated blacks and whites in order to make money. Back there, before Jim Crow, before the invention of the Negro or the white man or the words and concepts to describe them, the Colonial population consisted largely of a great mass of white and black bondsmen, who occupied roughly the same economic category and were treated with equal contempt by the lords of the plantations and legislatures. Curiously unconcerned about their color, these people worked together and relaxed together. They had essentially the same interests, the same aspirations, and the same grievances. They conspired together and waged a common struggle against their common enemy – the big planter apparatus and a social system that legalized terror against black and white bondsmen.

In “The Road Not Taken,” a groundbreaking chapter from this book, Bennett demonstrates that race and racism were created by a vulnerable and outnumbered ruling class elite facing the prospect of multiracial working class rebellion. He chronicles over a century of deliberate use of state power, both legislative and violent, to define and separate Black and white.

Lerone Bennett, Jr., 1928-2018 A lifetime of anti-racist myth-busting - Challenge Newspaper - The Revolutionary Communist Progressive Labor Party


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
Click to expand...


That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.

But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.

The Diversity Of Black Political Views


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> 
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.
> 
> Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here lies the problem with whites. The never ending excuses. You can convince people not to support racism. Whites were convinced to be racists. If you read Lerone Bennetts  "The Road Not Taken", you see how whites were convinced to support racsim. In the same way, they can be unconvinced.
Click to expand...


Which whites are those?


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> There probably isn't a single person living who doesn't have ancestors who committed 'crimes' which caused others to suffer.  Whether or not they have profited from the crimes of their ancestors is debatable, of course.
> 
> Is there a point at which reparations for slavery would no longer be valid, because too much time/too many generations would have passed?  It's currently about 5 generations since the abolition of slavery, if you judge a generation by 30-year increments.  At this point, you would have people getting reparations for things done to their great-great-great grandparents.  Perhaps that is perfectly acceptable.  Would it be fine after 10 generations?  20?  Is the time limit (if any) the same for any crimes worthy of reparations, or is it different for each circumstance?
> 
> Lottery winners would be a similar situation in which individuals come into a large sum of money suddenly.  I assume that is the comparison Coyote was making.
> 
> There is a consensus in the black community about how reparations would be used?  There are something like 40-50 million blacks living in the US, how many would you say have agreed on how reparations given to individuals would be spent?
> 
> 
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.
> 
> Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.
Click to expand...


When you say whites will always support racism...are you any different than those who spout off crime stats whenever race comes up?  Aren't you lumping all whites together as if race is the only meaningful issue?


----------



## Coyote

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit comparison.  You compate slavery to wage labor?
> 
> 
> 
> Then conduct a seance and discuss the matter with their ancestors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why?  Comparing slavery to free labor is like comparing concentration camps to immigrsnt detainment centers.  False moral equivalency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who said the labor was free?
> Does your local Walmat feed, clothe and house their employees?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Substandard food, forced breeding, brutal whippings, substandard housing and white male right to rape...sounds like the owners took far more than labor.  I had no idea thete were slavery deniers like there are holocast deniers.  That is a new one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like most Black areas today with all of their freedoms going to waste.
> I’m not denying slavery; I’m denying the revisionist view of it lying only on all White people and asking why they haven’t taken advantage of the opportunity to catch up.
Click to expand...


Exactly what "revisionist view" are you talking about?  You're comparing it to wage labor...disregarding the very elemental fact of liberty.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> 
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
Click to expand...

The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> 
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.
> 
> Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you say whites will always support racism...are you any different than those who spout off crime stats whenever race comes up?  Aren't you lumping all whites together as if race is the only meaningful issue?
Click to expand...

I wouldnt say I was the same. Two different issues and that specific thing with the crime stats is merely a selective interpretation of the data.  Saying  that whites are going to support racism is general statement. The reason why is more specific and one that is historically documented and reflected in this nation as a race issue.


----------



## Coyote

gallantwarrior said:


> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?




Well...here are some ideas...

Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation

Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report

This is what reparations could actually look like in America


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> 
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. *However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power*.
Click to expand...


But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> 
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. *However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.
Click to expand...

Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think thats a false equivalency. The closest any other group of people come to experiencing the horrors and atrocities committed by the US are probably the NA's.  They are currently getting some reparations.  Blacks experienced the atrocity and horrors of slavery for multiple generations without pay.
> 
> No. I dont see there being a point where reparations would be invalid. Its pretty much coded in the word reparations. Nowhere is a time limit specified. I know thats what most whites would like. For Blacks to pretend it never happened.  The problem is only going to get worse and larger with time. Whites should learn that its not clever or cool to welch on their debts.  Whites in the US profited from slavery either directly or indirectly and now theyre against making things right.
> 
> Pretty much. We understand as a group that the only way to fight racism is to invest in our own communities. I have never taken an official count. It doesnt work that way with us.
> 
> 
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.
> 
> Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here lies the problem with whites. The never ending excuses. You can convince people not to support racism. Whites were convinced to be racists. If you read Lerone Bennetts  "The Road Not Taken", you see how whites were convinced to support racsim. In the same way, they can be unconvinced.
Click to expand...


Isn't Asclepias black?  He's the one who said he can't convince people not to support racism.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> 
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
Click to expand...


I think democrats do not see things as you think.  Unfortunately republicans do and this is why we have to read republicans here ever day accusing democrats of thinking of blacks as one group.

Yes we are all free to support whatever business we want. But the reason why A says what he does is that in order for blacks to create the jobs needed, to rebuild, and to redevelop black communities, blacks must support efforts from other blacks. 

There are over 18 million businesses in the U.S. There are 2.6 million back owned businesses. The African-American population is faring slightly better in terms of small business ownership. African-American make up 13.2% of the United States population, and they own 11% of the country’s small businesses. Now of curse this proportion is never considered when we discuss race.

The “*2007 Economic Census Survey of Business Owners*â€ found that as of 2007, 1.9 million black businesses accounted for 7.1% of the nation’s businesses, 0.8% of total employees and about 0.5% of total receipts. A summary of the findings for black businesses can be found *here*.

“It is encouraging that the minority business community is growing and making progress relative to all U.S. firms, but economic parity remains elusive, â€ said *MBDA’s National Director David A. Hinson*.

http://www.blackenterprise.com/number-of-black-owned-businesses-increased-by-61/

In both cases we see the percentages blacks have is lower than the percentage of blacks in the population.

There are many reasons this happens and white racism is one of them. Whites refuse to do business with us, while we're making white business owners rich. Yet these same business won't give to indepedent black organizations that work in the black community. Most of our money is in white banks. But it took an act of congress most republicans oppose called the CRA to get banks to put some of our money back into black neighborhoods. So when people here start trying to argue with us about the black communiy and can't understand how we can  "blame whitey" it is stands to reason that you apparently don't know about these matters. Whites are not being blamed just because they exist and are white.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.
> 
> Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here lies the problem with whites. The never ending excuses. You can convince people not to support racism. Whites were convinced to be racists. If you read Lerone Bennetts  "The Road Not Taken", you see how whites were convinced to support racsim. In the same way, they can be unconvinced.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which whites are those?
Click to expand...


Have you read the "The Road Not Taken"?


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, the best way to fight racism is with racism.  Yet you rail against whites wishing to invest in white communities in order to ensure the economic, social, and intellectual success of those communities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.
> 
> Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here lies the problem with whites. The never ending excuses. You can convince people not to support racism. Whites were convinced to be racists. If you read Lerone Bennetts  "The Road Not Taken", you see how whites were convinced to support racsim. In the same way, they can be unconvinced.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Isn't Asclepias black?  He's the one who said he can't convince people not to support racism.
Click to expand...


I read the qoutes wrong. My apology.

I still stand by what I say to you though. Help whites end their racism please.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
Click to expand...


Those questions did not deserve answers.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> No the best way to fight racism is concentrate on your own community and build it together.  Youve never seen me rail against what whites spend their money on. I could give a shit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.
> 
> Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here lies the problem with whites. The never ending excuses. You can convince people not to support racism. Whites were convinced to be racists. If you read Lerone Bennetts  "The Road Not Taken", you see how whites were convinced to support racsim. In the same way, they can be unconvinced.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Isn't Asclepias black?  He's the one who said he can't convince people not to support racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the qoutes wrong. My apology.
> 
> I still stand by what I say to you though. Help whites end their racism please.
Click to expand...


I'd prefer (and think it would be more likely to be effective) helping everyone end their racism than focusing on just whites.  And yes, I'm using racism as the belief in the superiority or inferiority of one race to others, rather than the systemic application of such.

Of course, I doubt I'm helping too many people do much of anything.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> That doesn't seem to be fighting racism so much as ignoring it.
> 
> There's no requirement for anyone to fight racism, I'm not denigrating the idea of building a person's community, it just doesn't seem to be fighting racism.
> 
> 
> 
> I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.
> 
> Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here lies the problem with whites. The never ending excuses. You can convince people not to support racism. Whites were convinced to be racists. If you read Lerone Bennetts  "The Road Not Taken", you see how whites were convinced to support racsim. In the same way, they can be unconvinced.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Isn't Asclepias black?  He's the one who said he can't convince people not to support racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the qoutes wrong. My apology.
> 
> I still stand by what I say to you though. Help whites end their racism please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd prefer (and think it would be more likely to be effective) helping everyone end their racism than focusing on just whites.  And yes, I'm using racism as the belief in the superiority or inferiority of one race to others, rather than the systemic application of such.
> 
> Of course, I doubt I'm helping too many people do much of anything.
Click to expand...


You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I cant convince people to not support racism. I am of the opinion that whites will always support racism simply because it gives them an advantage. This is the same thing Drumpf knows. While white people make all this noise about him you have to remember that the vast majority of people that voted for him were whites.
> 
> Making sure Black people are economically empowered fights the effects of racism. Until Blacks control the system that pretty much all the fighting one can do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here lies the problem with whites. The never ending excuses. You can convince people not to support racism. Whites were convinced to be racists. If you read Lerone Bennetts  "The Road Not Taken", you see how whites were convinced to support racsim. In the same way, they can be unconvinced.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Isn't Asclepias black?  He's the one who said he can't convince people not to support racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the qoutes wrong. My apology.
> 
> I still stand by what I say to you though. Help whites end their racism please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd prefer (and think it would be more likely to be effective) helping everyone end their racism than focusing on just whites.  And yes, I'm using racism as the belief in the superiority or inferiority of one race to others, rather than the systemic application of such.
> 
> Of course, I doubt I'm helping too many people do much of anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.
Click to expand...


Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.

Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.

Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.


----------



## Asclepias

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here lies the problem with whites. The never ending excuses. You can convince people not to support racism. Whites were convinced to be racists. If you read Lerone Bennetts  "The Road Not Taken", you see how whites were convinced to support racsim. In the same way, they can be unconvinced.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't Asclepias black?  He's the one who said he can't convince people not to support racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the qoutes wrong. My apology.
> 
> I still stand by what I say to you though. Help whites end their racism please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd prefer (and think it would be more likely to be effective) helping everyone end their racism than focusing on just whites.  And yes, I'm using racism as the belief in the superiority or inferiority of one race to others, rather than the systemic application of such.
> 
> Of course, I doubt I'm helping too many people do much of anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I am speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
Click to expand...

Sounds like affirmative action. Instead of it being given to only Black people whites and everyone else got more of it.


----------



## IM2

Montrovant said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here lies the problem with whites. The never ending excuses. You can convince people not to support racism. Whites were convinced to be racists. If you read Lerone Bennetts  "The Road Not Taken", you see how whites were convinced to support racsim. In the same way, they can be unconvinced.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't Asclepias black?  He's the one who said he can't convince people not to support racism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read the qoutes wrong. My apology.
> 
> I still stand by what I say to you though. Help whites end their racism please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd prefer (and think it would be more likely to be effective) helping everyone end their racism than focusing on just whites.  And yes, I'm using racism as the belief in the superiority or inferiority of one race to others, rather than the systemic application of such.
> 
> Of course, I doubt I'm helping too many people do much of anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
Click to expand...


Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:

*Definition of racism 

1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race 

2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles 

b : a political or social system founded on racism 

3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination* 

Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop. 

Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. *However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
Click to expand...

A racist system or that racism exists?

What specifically makes our system racist?


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. *However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
Click to expand...

Both.

The way it was set up. The way it was and continues to be used to assist whites while punishing Blacks.


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> 
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think democrats do not see things as you think.  Unfortunately republicans do and this is why we have to read republicans here ever day accusing democrats of thinking of blacks as one group.
> 
> Yes we are all free to support whatever business we want. But the reason why A says what he does is that in order for blacks to create the jobs needed, to rebuild, and to redevelop black communities, blacks must support efforts from other blacks.
> 
> There are over 18 million businesses in the U.S. There are 2.6 million back owned businesses. The African-American population is faring slightly better in terms of small business ownership. African-American make up 13.2% of the United States population, and they own 11% of the country’s small businesses. Now of curse this proportion is never considered when we discuss race.
> 
> The “*2007 Economic Census Survey of Business Owners*â€ found that as of 2007, 1.9 million black businesses accounted for 7.1% of the nation’s businesses, 0.8% of total employees and about 0.5% of total receipts. A summary of the findings for black businesses can be found *here*.
> 
> “It is encouraging that the minority business community is growing and making progress relative to all U.S. firms, but economic parity remains elusive, â€ said *MBDA’s National Director David A. Hinson*.
> 
> http://www.blackenterprise.com/number-of-black-owned-businesses-increased-by-61/
> 
> In both cases we see the percentages blacks have is lower than the percentage of blacks in the population.
> 
> There are many reasons this happens and white racism is one of them. Whites refuse to do business with us, while we're making white business owners rich. Yet these same business won't give to indepedent black organizations that work in the black community. Most of our money is in white banks. But it took an act of congress most republicans oppose called the CRA to get banks to put some of our money back into black neighborhoods. So when people here start trying to argue with us about the black communiy and can't understand how we can  "blame whitey" it is stands to reason that you apparently don't know about these matters. Whites are not being blamed just because they exist and are white.
Click to expand...

I believe in supporting local small business and farms regardless of race....but you do make a valid point about not being aware.  On the other hand though...I get the feeling from some here that we are naturally racist because we are white or as one person said all whites are white supremacists.  When you lump everyone into one label...then discussion ends.  People get, rightfully, defensive.

Like I said, I don’t support reparations per se, to individuals, but I do strongly support investment into neighborhoods, empowering people through home ownership, and investing in education and that those solutions need to come from within each community...not a one size fits all as if all black or other people were the same across the country.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> 
> 
> The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. *However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Both.
> 
> The way it was set up. The way it was and continues to be used to assist whites while punishing Blacks.
Click to expand...


When you talk about "our system" - what do you mean?  Government?


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't Asclepias black?  He's the one who said he can't convince people not to support racism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I read the qoutes wrong. My apology.
> 
> I still stand by what I say to you though. Help whites end their racism please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd prefer (and think it would be more likely to be effective) helping everyone end their racism than focusing on just whites.  And yes, I'm using racism as the belief in the superiority or inferiority of one race to others, rather than the systemic application of such.
> 
> Of course, I doubt I'm helping too many people do much of anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
Click to expand...



I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Those questions did not deserve answers.
Click to expand...


Why not?


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. *However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
Click to expand...


Do you believe that racism is gone?


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> 
> 
> The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. *However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you believe that racism is gone?
Click to expand...


Nope.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. *However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Both.
> 
> The way it was set up. The way it was and continues to be used to assist whites while punishing Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you talk about "our system" - what do you mean?  Government?
Click to expand...

Government and to an extent white belief system.




 .


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I read the qoutes wrong. My apology.
> 
> I still stand by what I say to you though. Help whites end their racism please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd prefer (and think it would be more likely to be effective) helping everyone end their racism than focusing on just whites.  And yes, I'm using racism as the belief in the superiority or inferiority of one race to others, rather than the systemic application of such.
> 
> Of course, I doubt I'm helping too many people do much of anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
Click to expand...

Thats not racism Thats tribalism or nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I read the qoutes wrong. My apology.
> 
> I still stand by what I say to you though. Help whites end their racism please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd prefer (and think it would be more likely to be effective) helping everyone end their racism than focusing on just whites.  And yes, I'm using racism as the belief in the superiority or inferiority of one race to others, rather than the systemic application of such.
> 
> Of course, I doubt I'm helping too many people do much of anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
Click to expand...


You can disagree all you want but recorded histroy doesn't show what you believe to be the case. Whites in these forums just refuse to understand that pawning off of what whites have done with the comment all races can be racist is just bs.


----------



## Coyote

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> 
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think democrats do not see things as you think.  Unfortunately republicans do and this is why we have to read republicans here ever day accusing democrats of thinking of blacks as one group.
> 
> Yes we are all free to support whatever business we want. But the reason why A says what he does is that in order for blacks to create the jobs needed, to rebuild, and to redevelop black communities, blacks must support efforts from other blacks.
> 
> There are over 18 million businesses in the U.S. There are 2.6 million back owned businesses. The African-American population is faring slightly better in terms of small business ownership. African-American make up 13.2% of the United States population, and they own 11% of the country’s small businesses. Now of curse this proportion is never considered when we discuss race.
> 
> The “*2007 Economic Census Survey of Business Owners*â€ found that as of 2007, 1.9 million black businesses accounted for 7.1% of the nation’s businesses, 0.8% of total employees and about 0.5% of total receipts. A summary of the findings for black businesses can be found *here*.
> 
> “It is encouraging that the minority business community is growing and making progress relative to all U.S. firms, but economic parity remains elusive, â€ said *MBDA’s National Director David A. Hinson*.
> 
> http://www.blackenterprise.com/number-of-black-owned-businesses-increased-by-61/
> 
> In both cases we see the percentages blacks have is lower than the percentage of blacks in the population.
> 
> There are many reasons this happens and white racism is one of them. Whites refuse to do business with us, while we're making white business owners rich. Yet these same business won't give to indepedent black organizations that work in the black community. Most of our money is in white banks. But it took an act of congress most republicans oppose called the CRA to get banks to put some of our money back into black neighborhoods. So when people here start trying to argue with us about the black communiy and can't understand how we can  "blame whitey" it is stands to reason that you apparently don't know about these matters. Whites are not being blamed just because they exist and are white.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe in supporting local small business and farms regardless of race....but you do make a valid point about not being aware.  On the other hand though...I get the feeling from some here that we are naturally racist because we are white or as one person said all whites are white supremacists.  When you lump everyone into one label...then discussion ends.  People get, rightfully, defensive.
> 
> Like I said, I don’t support reparations per se, to individuals, but I do strongly support investment into neighborhoods, empowering people through home ownership, and investing in education and that those solutions need to come from within each community...not a one size fits all as if all black or other people were the same across the country.
Click to expand...



I wanted to add something to this...because I thought it interesting.  I have lived in WV almost 30 years, though I was not raised there.  NPR has a show called Inside Appalachia and they did a series on race.  WV is a very white state, but in the coalfields, there are a lot of blacks, who migrated, attracted to the higher salaries of the mines compared to farming. They did a lot of interviews and such, and talked with many people about race.  Many of them grew up when segregation was still in effect, but in the mines everyone worked together, depended for their lives on each other, and shared their lives despite race.  It was interesting to listen to those folks talking.  But what I wonder is - what community means.  In this area does it mean the white community vs the black community?  Or is it - we're all struggling together here, looking for solutions in an area where mining jobs are largely gone compared to 30 years ago, towns are depopulated, and people are struggling regardless of race.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. *However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you believe that racism is gone?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.
Click to expand...


Then why ask the question you asked?


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd prefer (and think it would be more likely to be effective) helping everyone end their racism than focusing on just whites.  And yes, I'm using racism as the belief in the superiority or inferiority of one race to others, rather than the systemic application of such.
> 
> Of course, I doubt I'm helping too many people do much of anything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
Click to expand...


I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think democrats do not see things as you think.  Unfortunately republicans do and this is why we have to read republicans here ever day accusing democrats of thinking of blacks as one group.
> 
> Yes we are all free to support whatever business we want. But the reason why A says what he does is that in order for blacks to create the jobs needed, to rebuild, and to redevelop black communities, blacks must support efforts from other blacks.
> 
> There are over 18 million businesses in the U.S. There are 2.6 million back owned businesses. The African-American population is faring slightly better in terms of small business ownership. African-American make up 13.2% of the United States population, and they own 11% of the country’s small businesses. Now of curse this proportion is never considered when we discuss race.
> 
> The “*2007 Economic Census Survey of Business Owners*â€ found that as of 2007, 1.9 million black businesses accounted for 7.1% of the nation’s businesses, 0.8% of total employees and about 0.5% of total receipts. A summary of the findings for black businesses can be found *here*.
> 
> “It is encouraging that the minority business community is growing and making progress relative to all U.S. firms, but economic parity remains elusive, â€ said *MBDA’s National Director David A. Hinson*.
> 
> Number of Black-Owned Businesses Increased by 61%
> 
> In both cases we see the percentages blacks have is lower than the percentage of blacks in the population.
> 
> There are many reasons this happens and white racism is one of them. Whites refuse to do business with us, while we're making white business owners rich. Yet these same business won't give to indepedent black organizations that work in the black community. Most of our money is in white banks. But it took an act of congress most republicans oppose called the CRA to get banks to put some of our money back into black neighborhoods. So when people here start trying to argue with us about the black communiy and can't understand how we can  "blame whitey" it is stands to reason that you apparently don't know about these matters. Whites are not being blamed just because they exist and are white.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe in supporting local small business and farms regardless of race....but you do make a valid point about not being aware.  On the other hand though...I get the feeling from some here that we are naturally racist because we are white or as one person said all whites are white supremacists.  When you lump everyone into one label...then discussion ends.  People get, rightfully, defensive.
> 
> Like I said, I don’t support reparations per se, to individuals, but I do strongly support investment into neighborhoods, empowering people through home ownership, and investing in education and that those solutions need to come from within each community...not a one size fits all as if all black or other people were the same across the country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I wanted to add something to this...because I thought it interesting.  I have lived in WV almost 30 years, though I was not raised there.  NPR has a show called Inside Appalachia and they did a series on race.  WV is a very white state, but in the coalfields, there are a lot of blacks, who migrated, attracted to the higher salaries of the mines compared to farming. They did a lot of interviews and such, and talked with many people about race.  Many of them grew up when segregation was still in effect, but in the mines everyone worked together, depended for their lives on each other, and shared their lives despite race.  It was interesting to listen to those folks talking.  But what I wonder is - what community means.  In this area does it mean the white community vs the black community?  Or is it - we're all struggling together here, looking for solutions in an area where mining jobs are largely gone compared to 30 years ago, towns are depopulated, and people are struggling regardless of race.
Click to expand...


It very well may mean both.


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.
> 
> 
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you believe that racism is gone?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Then why ask the question you asked?*
Click to expand...


Because people can be racist, systems can be racists, policies and laws can be racist...it can be one, some or all.  So what makes our SYSTEM racist? As opposed to individuals?

I can think of some things - the criminal justice system for example.  That would be a system that while not overtly racist, has ended up being racist in how things are handled.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> But do they even see the problems in the same way?  For example - the varying views on racism in the polls.
> 
> 
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Both.
> 
> The way it was set up. The way it was and continues to be used to assist whites while punishing Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you talk about "our system" - what do you mean?  Government?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Government and to an extent white belief system.
> 
> View attachment 204883 .
Click to expand...



What white belief system?


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> 
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you believe that racism is gone?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Then why ask the question you asked?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because people can be racist, systems can be racists, policies and laws can be racist...it can be one, some or all.  So what makes our SYSTEM racist? As opposed to individuals?
> 
> I can think of some things - the criminal justice system for example.  That would be a system that while not overtly racist, has ended up being racist in how things are handled.
Click to expand...

*...while not overtly racist
*
Seriously?


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lottery is an example of what people do when the win large sums of money.  Same with rhose who got tax rebates as stimulus.  People think individually first, family second..and then tribe or community.  I dont see why this would be any different.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group.
Click to expand...

I ask you this, if I were white, and if I were to declare that I preferred to deal with white-only businesses, even going out of my way to do so, would you call that racist?


----------



## Montrovant

IM2 said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't Asclepias black?  He's the one who said he can't convince people not to support racism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I read the qoutes wrong. My apology.
> 
> I still stand by what I say to you though. Help whites end their racism please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd prefer (and think it would be more likely to be effective) helping everyone end their racism than focusing on just whites.  And yes, I'm using racism as the belief in the superiority or inferiority of one race to others, rather than the systemic application of such.
> 
> Of course, I doubt I'm helping too many people do much of anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
Click to expand...


When a word has multiple definitions, they don't all apply at once.  

I'm sorry, but the idea that only whites are actually ever racist, and anyone else is simply reacting to white racism, is asinine.  Racism is not something only whites are capable of.  I'm not saying everyone, or anyone in particular at all, is racist.  I'm merely pointing out the obvious truth that any person can be racist, when using the first definition you posted.

I have been perfectly happy to agree on other occasions that not everyone is capable of systemic, institutional racism.  I'll do so again now: not everyone is in a position to be capable of systemic, institutional racism.  In the US, whites have been the only group in such a position for most or all of our history.

Whether one is black or some other race, if you post on this message board, plenty of people are going to tell you you are wrong.  

Perhaps you should try to understand that disagreeing with the premise that only whites are racist does not mean a person believes "everyone else is racist."  Generally I think it means that everyone is human, and humans are capable of racism.  That does not mean "everybody is a racist."  That's silly hyperbole.  It just means that racism is not the exclusive province of any particular race.

If you want race relations to improve (which I am guessing is what you are saying when you talk about things changing, and would include equal treatment by government and society at large), telling whites they are the only ones who need to improve in any way isn't likely to help.  People do not usually react well to being told they are bad or wrong compared to others, and they need to improve while everyone else is doing fine, I don't think.  

As a side note: I don't know that many whites, at least in the US, consider their race a "community."  That may be because whites haven't needed to think of themselves that way, but that doesn't change that I don't think it is a common consideration.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
Click to expand...

I disagree. Black people from different groups had issues with each other all the time and they were the same race. Look at the Egyptians and the Nubians. Same race of people but they fought for control of that area all the time.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you believe that racism is gone?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Then why ask the question you asked?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because people can be racist, systems can be racists, policies and laws can be racist...it can be one, some or all.  So what makes our SYSTEM racist? As opposed to individuals?
> 
> I can think of some things - the criminal justice system for example.  That would be a system that while not overtly racist, has ended up being racist in how things are handled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *...while not overtly racist
> *
> Seriously?
Click to expand...


Yes seriously.  By that I mean the laws themselves are not racist - but the way they might get applied, the way juveniles of one race get shunted into the criminal justice system far more frequently then those of the other race, the descrepencies in sentancing between black and white (though economic situations also play a role) - but that isn't "overt" in the sense that it isn't in the law, it's how people act.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alot of Blacks understand the fallacy of thinking individually in this country. If the Black population here in the US knew most Blacks were getting a large sum of money then they would agree to start working on the community. We know this because this is how we built successful communities in the past.
> 
> 
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I ask you this, if I were white, and if I were to declare that I preferred to deal with white-only businesses, even going out of my way to do so, would you call that racist?
Click to expand...

Depends on what your reasons were for doing it.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Black people from different groups had issues with each other all the time and they were the same race. Look at the Egyptians and the Nubians. Same race of people but they fought for control of that area all the time.
Click to expand...


Nationalism or tribalism is different than racism...I agree.  But racism didn't come into being with slavery - it has existed as long as humans have realized that other humans look very different.  Maybe it's not all that different than tribalism.  Essentially, racism (in a broader definition) is dehumanizing another group right?


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you believe that racism is gone?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Then why ask the question you asked?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because people can be racist, systems can be racists, policies and laws can be racist...it can be one, some or all.  So what makes our SYSTEM racist? As opposed to individuals?
> 
> I can think of some things - the criminal justice system for example.  That would be a system that while not overtly racist, has ended up being racist in how things are handled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *...while not overtly racist
> *
> Seriously?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes seriously.  By that I mean the laws themselves are not racist - but the way they might get applied, the way juveniles of one race get shunted into the criminal justice system far more frequently then those of the other race, the descrepencies in sentancing between black and white (though economic situations also play a role) - but that isn't "overt" in the sense that it isn't in the law, it's how people act.
Click to expand...

The laws are racist as well. Just because they code the language doesnt make it less racist. Why does a crack dealer get more time than a cocaine dealer?  One is traditionally Black and the other is traditionally white.  The net effect of the law is overtly racist.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> 
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I ask you this, if I were white, and if I were to declare that I preferred to deal with white-only businesses, even going out of my way to do so, would you call that racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Depends on what your reasons were for doing it.
Click to expand...


Agree...if you chose to frequent white business because you dislike blacks...that could be racist.  Likewise if you chose to frequent black business because you dislike whites.  But supporting particular business because you want to support a community isn't.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Black people from different groups had issues with each other all the time and they were the same race. Look at the Egyptians and the Nubians. Same race of people but they fought for control of that area all the time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nationalism or tribalism is different than racism...I agree.  But racism didn't come into being with slavery - it has existed as long as humans have realized that other humans look very different.  Maybe it's not all that different than tribalism.  Essentially, racism (in a broader definition) is dehumanizing another group right?
Click to expand...

There were Black people that were leaders in greek and roman societies. A racist system would not have allowed for that especially back then.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Then why ask the question you asked?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because people can be racist, systems can be racists, policies and laws can be racist...it can be one, some or all.  So what makes our SYSTEM racist? As opposed to individuals?
> 
> I can think of some things - the criminal justice system for example.  That would be a system that while not overtly racist, has ended up being racist in how things are handled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *...while not overtly racist
> *
> Seriously?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes seriously.  By that I mean the laws themselves are not racist - but the way they might get applied, the way juveniles of one race get shunted into the criminal justice system far more frequently then those of the other race, the descrepencies in sentancing between black and white (though economic situations also play a role) - but that isn't "overt" in the sense that it isn't in the law, it's how people act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The laws are racist as well. Just because they code the language doesnt make it less racist. Why does a crack dealer get more time than a cocaine dealer?  One is traditionally Black and the other is traditionally white.  The net effect of the law is overtly racist.
Click to expand...


Ironically I was thinking of that - the net effect IS racist, but is the intent of the law racist?  Was the law designed to be racially biased?  I don't think so, it just ended up being that way.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
> 
> 
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Black people from different groups had issues with each other all the time and they were the same race. Look at the Egyptians and the Nubians. Same race of people but they fought for control of that area all the time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nationalism or tribalism is different than racism...I agree.  But racism didn't come into being with slavery - it has existed as long as humans have realized that other humans look very different.  Maybe it's not all that different than tribalism.  Essentially, racism (in a broader definition) is dehumanizing another group right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There were Black people that were leaders in greek and roman societies. A racist system would not have allowed for that especially back then.
Click to expand...


True but not every culture is racist.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You see, now we are back to the cause of the problem. Whites trying to claim how everybody else is a racist. Non whites are reacting to white racism as you are using it. End that white racism you end the reaction to it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
Click to expand...


it's not biology. We are not born a racists. Ethnocentrism is also of mistaken for racism. Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. Black people from different groups had issues with each other all the time and they were the same race. Look at the Egyptians and the Nubians. Same race of people but they fought for control of that area all the time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nationalism or tribalism is different than racism...I agree.  But racism didn't come into being with slavery - it has existed as long as humans have realized that other humans look very different.  Maybe it's not all that different than tribalism.  Essentially, racism (in a broader definition) is dehumanizing another group right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There were Black people that were leaders in greek and roman societies. A racist system would not have allowed for that especially back then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> True but not every culture is racist.
Click to expand...

What culture do you think practiced racism prior to europeans doing it?  Remember a racist person doesnt make the governmental system racist.  that has to be embraced by the population at large.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Coyote said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
Click to expand...

Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Then why ask the question you asked?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because people can be racist, systems can be racists, policies and laws can be racist...it can be one, some or all.  So what makes our SYSTEM racist? As opposed to individuals?
> 
> I can think of some things - the criminal justice system for example.  That would be a system that while not overtly racist, has ended up being racist in how things are handled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *...while not overtly racist
> *
> Seriously?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes seriously.  By that I mean the laws themselves are not racist - but the way they might get applied, the way juveniles of one race get shunted into the criminal justice system far more frequently then those of the other race, the descrepencies in sentancing between black and white (though economic situations also play a role) - but that isn't "overt" in the sense that it isn't in the law, it's how people act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The laws are racist as well. Just because they code the language doesnt make it less racist. Why does a crack dealer get more time than a cocaine dealer?  One is traditionally Black and the other is traditionally white.  The net effect of the law is overtly racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ironically I was thinking of that - the net effect IS racist, but is the intent of the law racist?  Was the law designed to be racially biased?  I don't think so, it just ended up being that way.
Click to expand...


But it was intended to be racially biased.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Then why ask the question you asked?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because people can be racist, systems can be racists, policies and laws can be racist...it can be one, some or all.  So what makes our SYSTEM racist? As opposed to individuals?
> 
> I can think of some things - the criminal justice system for example.  That would be a system that while not overtly racist, has ended up being racist in how things are handled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *...while not overtly racist
> *
> Seriously?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes seriously.  By that I mean the laws themselves are not racist - but the way they might get applied, the way juveniles of one race get shunted into the criminal justice system far more frequently then those of the other race, the descrepencies in sentancing between black and white (though economic situations also play a role) - but that isn't "overt" in the sense that it isn't in the law, it's how people act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The laws are racist as well. Just because they code the language doesnt make it less racist. Why does a crack dealer get more time than a cocaine dealer?  One is traditionally Black and the other is traditionally white.  The net effect of the law is overtly racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ironically I was thinking of that - the net effect IS racist, but is the intent of the law racist?  Was the law designed to be racially biased?  I don't think so, it just ended up being that way.
Click to expand...

What would be the intent of making two different laws for the same product?


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
> I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.
Click to expand...

Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every race has racists.  Racism is an issue of humanity, not one racial group.  I was pretty clear that I was speaking of racism in the individual belief form, the dictionary definition form of racism, rather than systemic racism.
> 
> Racism is not, and has never been, limited to whites.
> 
> Racism will probably never be ended as long as humanity exists, but minimizing it would be great.  Minimizing it for just one race would be less so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's not biology. We are not born a racists. Ethnocentrism is also of mistaken for racism. Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?
Click to expand...


Actually...it is.  It's hardwired...but...malleable.  Neuroscience is fascinating.

Brain hardwired to stereotype

“Just because a stereotype is ingrained in your brain, it doesn’t make you racist or sexist. We are all subject to subconscious stereotypes but we can consciously overrule that."

Is racism hard-wired? Scans show people's brains respond more strongly to information that reinforces negative stereotypes

So there is primitive hardwiring...but it doesn't have to define us.  That is where learned behavior comes into being.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> 
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Both.
> 
> The way it was set up. The way it was and continues to be used to assist whites while punishing Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you talk about "our system" - what do you mean?  Government?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Government and to an extent white belief system.
> 
> View attachment 204883 .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What white belief system?
Click to expand...

The white belief system that A. (a black man) claims to understand, although he has never been white and apparently has never lived within that white "belief system".  He claims not white can ever understand the black peoples plight and yet, he understands whites, and their "system", fully.  
Until A. has walked a mile in a white person's shoes, maybe he should stick to what he knows: black people stuff.


----------



## IM2

gallantwarrior said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
> I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.
Click to expand...


It doesn't matter what you agree with. You're a liar. No one gives a damn what you say immigrants came here with. White immigrants were white and benefitted from what every other white person benefit from. They were not excluded.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because people can be racist, systems can be racists, policies and laws can be racist...it can be one, some or all.  So what makes our SYSTEM racist? As opposed to individuals?
> 
> I can think of some things - the criminal justice system for example.  That would be a system that while not overtly racist, has ended up being racist in how things are handled.
> 
> 
> 
> *...while not overtly racist
> *
> Seriously?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes seriously.  By that I mean the laws themselves are not racist - but the way they might get applied, the way juveniles of one race get shunted into the criminal justice system far more frequently then those of the other race, the descrepencies in sentancing between black and white (though economic situations also play a role) - but that isn't "overt" in the sense that it isn't in the law, it's how people act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The laws are racist as well. Just because they code the language doesnt make it less racist. Why does a crack dealer get more time than a cocaine dealer?  One is traditionally Black and the other is traditionally white.  The net effect of the law is overtly racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ironically I was thinking of that - the net effect IS racist, but is the intent of the law racist?  Was the law designed to be racially biased?  I don't think so, it just ended up being that way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What would be the intent of making two different laws for the same product?
Click to expand...


It's not regarded as the same...and there are some differences:  Crack vs. Cocaine: Here's The Real Difference - ATTN:

I think the subconscious reason though was cocaine was thought of as clean, upper class white and less addictive while crack was associated with ghetto, black, highly addictive.  Just my opinion though.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
> I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
Click to expand...


The Japanese SURVIVORS of internment had a right.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> 
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Both.
> 
> The way it was set up. The way it was and continues to be used to assist whites while punishing Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you talk about "our system" - what do you mean?  Government?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Government and to an extent white belief system.
> 
> View attachment 204883 .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What white belief system?
Click to expand...

The one that currently enables the racism here in the US.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> 
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I ask you this, if I were white, and if I were to declare that I preferred to deal with white-only businesses, even going out of my way to do so, would you call that racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Depends on what your reasons were for doing it.
Click to expand...

Let's say I just really want to promote and strengthen the white community and see patronizing white businesses as a way of achieving this goal.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> 
> 
> Both.
> 
> The way it was set up. The way it was and continues to be used to assist whites while punishing Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you talk about "our system" - what do you mean?  Government?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Government and to an extent white belief system.
> 
> View attachment 204883 .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What white belief system?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The one that currently enables the racism here in the US.
Click to expand...


That is awfully broad.  So much so, it is meaningless.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> *...while not overtly racist
> *
> Seriously?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes seriously.  By that I mean the laws themselves are not racist - but the way they might get applied, the way juveniles of one race get shunted into the criminal justice system far more frequently then those of the other race, the descrepencies in sentancing between black and white (though economic situations also play a role) - but that isn't "overt" in the sense that it isn't in the law, it's how people act.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The laws are racist as well. Just because they code the language doesnt make it less racist. Why does a crack dealer get more time than a cocaine dealer?  One is traditionally Black and the other is traditionally white.  The net effect of the law is overtly racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ironically I was thinking of that - the net effect IS racist, but is the intent of the law racist?  Was the law designed to be racially biased?  I don't think so, it just ended up being that way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What would be the intent of making two different laws for the same product?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not regarded as the same...and there are some differences:  Crack vs. Cocaine: Here's The Real Difference - ATTN:
> 
> I think the subconscious reason though was cocaine was thought of as clean, upper class white and less addictive while crack was associated with ghetto, black, highly addictive.  Just my opinion though.
Click to expand...

Therein lies the white belief system. Cocaine is cocaine. There is no reason to treat possession of it differently. You dont get a bigger ticket because you drive a Bently vs a Pinto.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes seriously.  By that I mean the laws themselves are not racist - but the way they might get applied, the way juveniles of one race get shunted into the criminal justice system far more frequently then those of the other race, the descrepencies in sentancing between black and white (though economic situations also play a role) - but that isn't "overt" in the sense that it isn't in the law, it's how people act.
> 
> 
> 
> The laws are racist as well. Just because they code the language doesnt make it less racist. Why does a crack dealer get more time than a cocaine dealer?  One is traditionally Black and the other is traditionally white.  The net effect of the law is overtly racist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ironically I was thinking of that - the net effect IS racist, but is the intent of the law racist?  Was the law designed to be racially biased?  I don't think so, it just ended up being that way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What would be the intent of making two different laws for the same product?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not regarded as the same...and there are some differences:  Crack vs. Cocaine: Here's The Real Difference - ATTN:
> 
> I think the subconscious reason though was cocaine was thought of as clean, upper class white and less addictive while crack was associated with ghetto, black, highly addictive.  Just my opinion though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Therein lies the white belief system. Cocaine is cocaine. There is no reason to treat possession of it differently. You dont get a bigger ticket because you drive a Bently vs a Pinto.
Click to expand...


But penalties differ among opiods, meth, cocaine, pot....

I do agree though, the penalties for crack and cocaine should be the same.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Both.
> 
> The way it was set up. The way it was and continues to be used to assist whites while punishing Blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you talk about "our system" - what do you mean?  Government?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Government and to an extent white belief system.
> 
> View attachment 204883 .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What white belief system?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The one that currently enables the racism here in the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is awfully broad.  So much so, it is meaningless.
Click to expand...

You just gave a great example. Why is crack cocaine punished more harshly than any other cocaine?


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you talk about "our system" - what do you mean?  Government?
> 
> 
> 
> Government and to an extent white belief system.
> 
> View attachment 204883 .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What white belief system?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The one that currently enables the racism here in the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is awfully broad.  So much so, it is meaningless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You just gave a great example. Why is crack cocaine punished more harshly than any other cocaine?
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be.

So I agree, in that particular case, it is a white belief system that creates a discrepency.


----------



## IM2

gallantwarrior said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> 
> 
> Both.
> 
> The way it was set up. The way it was and continues to be used to assist whites while punishing Blacks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you talk about "our system" - what do you mean?  Government?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Government and to an extent white belief system.
> 
> View attachment 204883 .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What white belief system?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The white belief system that A. (a black man) claims to understand, although he has never been white and apparently has never lived within that white "belief system".  He claims not white can ever understand the black peoples plight and yet, he understands whites, and their "system", fully.
> Until A. has walked a mile in a white person's shoes, maybe he should stick to what he knows: black people stuff.
Click to expand...


We have walked in white peoples shoes. We live within the white belief system. This is a white dominated culture. For us to survive we must understand white people. This is weak and I mean this entire discussion . All whites in here are doing is posting false equivalences and excuses.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> The laws are racist as well. Just because they code the language doesnt make it less racist. Why does a crack dealer get more time than a cocaine dealer?  One is traditionally Black and the other is traditionally white.  The net effect of the law is overtly racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ironically I was thinking of that - the net effect IS racist, but is the intent of the law racist?  Was the law designed to be racially biased?  I don't think so, it just ended up being that way.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What would be the intent of making two different laws for the same product?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not regarded as the same...and there are some differences:  Crack vs. Cocaine: Here's The Real Difference - ATTN:
> 
> I think the subconscious reason though was cocaine was thought of as clean, upper class white and less addictive while crack was associated with ghetto, black, highly addictive.  Just my opinion though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Therein lies the white belief system. Cocaine is cocaine. There is no reason to treat possession of it differently. You dont get a bigger ticket because you drive a Bently vs a Pinto.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But penalties differ among opiods, meth, cocaine, pot....
> 
> I do agree though, the penalties for crack and cocaine should be the same.
Click to expand...

Well which ones are punished less harshly and which ones draw more pity and acceptance due to the race of the users?  Why isnt a crack head the same as a opiod head?


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ironically I was thinking of that - the net effect IS racist, but is the intent of the law racist?  Was the law designed to be racially biased?  I don't think so, it just ended up being that way.
> 
> 
> 
> What would be the intent of making two different laws for the same product?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not regarded as the same...and there are some differences:  Crack vs. Cocaine: Here's The Real Difference - ATTN:
> 
> I think the subconscious reason though was cocaine was thought of as clean, upper class white and less addictive while crack was associated with ghetto, black, highly addictive.  Just my opinion though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Therein lies the white belief system. Cocaine is cocaine. There is no reason to treat possession of it differently. You dont get a bigger ticket because you drive a Bently vs a Pinto.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But penalties differ among opiods, meth, cocaine, pot....
> 
> I do agree though, the penalties for crack and cocaine should be the same.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well which ones are punished less harshly and which ones draw more pity and acceptance due to the race of the users?  Why isnt a crack head the same as a opiod head?
Click to expand...


You are absolutely right in that regard.  Attention wasn't gained until the white community started to suffer from the effects of drug abuse and addiction.  That is a very good point.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> 
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I ask you this, if I were white, and if I were to declare that I preferred to deal with white-only businesses, even going out of my way to do so, would you call that racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Depends on what your reasons were for doing it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's say I just really want to promote and strengthen the white community and see patronizing white businesses as a way of achieving this goal.
Click to expand...

Then I wouldnt say it was racist. I would wonder why you thought you needed to do that since the white community is already in control of the government and the resources here in the US.


----------



## Coyote

I will say this.  There is a big discrepency in how drug abuse is viewed, and it's on a racial line.

White opiod addicts are far more likely to get sympathy and attention and a push to treatment as well as public policy.

Black addicts are more likely to be blamed for their addiction - as products of the ghetto and instead of public policy, the push is into the criminal justice system.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again this is the problem with many whites. You want define racism to try making everyone else just as racist. But:
> 
> *Definition of racism
> 
> 1 : a belief that **race** is the primary **determinant** of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
> 
> 2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
> 
> b : a political or social system founded on racism
> 
> 3 : racial **prejudice** or discrimination*
> 
> Systemic racism is part of the definition of racism. And even if we limit it to what you want it to mean, the belief in white supremacy has been a cause of world problems. So it is important for whites to work on ending the racism in their community.  What you call racism by others is the reaction and anger caused by white racism. Certainly this must be hard to understand when people actually tell a black person how they are wrong or should not be angry when they post here like we have no right to be. In order for things to change, this attitude many whites have whereby they want immediately to tell everybody else how everybody is a racist when they are asked to cleanse their community of it must stop.
> 
> Racism is a relatively new concept to humanity. Racism did not exist 1,000 years ago or even further back. It is something that can be ended
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's not biology. We are not born a racists. Ethnocentrism is also of mistaken for racism. Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually...it is.  It's hardwired...but...malleable.  Neuroscience is fascinating.
> 
> Brain hardwired to stereotype
> 
> “Just because a stereotype is ingrained in your brain, it doesn’t make you racist or sexist. We are all subject to subconscious stereotypes but we can consciously overrule that."
> 
> Is racism hard-wired? Scans show people's brains respond more strongly to information that reinforces negative stereotypes
> 
> So there is primitive hardwiring...but it doesn't have to define us.  That is where learned behavior comes into being.
Click to expand...


Racism is a learned behavior. We are talking about racism, not stereotyping. You can stereotype within the same race and the stereotype doesn't have to infer racial superiority.

Now how answering the question. "Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?"


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
> 
> 
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's not biology. We are not born a racists. Ethnocentrism is also of mistaken for racism. Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually...it is.  It's hardwired...but...malleable.  Neuroscience is fascinating.
> 
> Brain hardwired to stereotype
> 
> “Just because a stereotype is ingrained in your brain, it doesn’t make you racist or sexist. We are all subject to subconscious stereotypes but we can consciously overrule that."
> 
> Is racism hard-wired? Scans show people's brains respond more strongly to information that reinforces negative stereotypes
> 
> So there is primitive hardwiring...but it doesn't have to define us.  That is where learned behavior comes into being.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Racism is a learned behavior. We are talking about racism, not stereotyping. You can stereotype within the same race and the stereotype doesn't have to infer racial superiority.
> 
> Now how answering the question. "Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?"
Click to expand...


Racism is based on stereotyping though.  Somewhere I read that babies, at a certain age - automatically start identifying with the faces of the race they were raised among - ie familiar vs unfamiliar and our biological hard wiring says - danger!  It's in a sense "natural" to view "the other" as "not us" - it's our learning...or as one article I read put it - our liberal impulses - that teach us to overcome our biology which tells us that "familiar" is safe and "unfamiliar" is dangerous.  But if we're raised with people who reinforce that hardwiring - we become xenophobic, racist, etc.  That is learned...


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
> I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
Click to expand...

Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Racism has existed for as long as humanity has had tribes.  And racists can be black, white, or other.  We are biologically hardwired to be fearful and exclusive of "the other".
> 
> 
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's not biology. We are not born a racists. Ethnocentrism is also of mistaken for racism. Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually...it is.  It's hardwired...but...malleable.  Neuroscience is fascinating.
> 
> Brain hardwired to stereotype
> 
> “Just because a stereotype is ingrained in your brain, it doesn’t make you racist or sexist. We are all subject to subconscious stereotypes but we can consciously overrule that."
> 
> Is racism hard-wired? Scans show people's brains respond more strongly to information that reinforces negative stereotypes
> 
> So there is primitive hardwiring...but it doesn't have to define us.  That is where learned behavior comes into being.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Racism is a learned behavior. We are talking about racism, not stereotyping. You can stereotype within the same race and the stereotype doesn't have to infer racial superiority.
> 
> Now how answering the question.* "Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?"*
Click to expand...


I try to.

Conversely...have you yourself ever accepted whites as equal...?  Real friends?  Or do you treat them as the enemy.


----------



## MaryL

Ken Burns program on the civil war pointed out that the Confederacy ultimately was so desperate, they ultimately  gave black slaves freedom in return for fighting for their cause. And those that fought for the confederacy realized that THAT bald faced consideration made the confederacy MOOT. When the south would employ black slaves to fight for  the states right to own slaves, well, it made the point, didn't it?


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Youre not going to find many Black people that dont see the racism that permeates the US. Some may have a different view on what may constitute racism in a specific event but in all my life I have never met a Black person that will say the US doesnt have a racist system (racism).
> 
> 
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you believe that racism is gone?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Then why ask the question you asked?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because people can be racist, systems can be racists, policies and laws can be racist...it can be one, some or all.  So what makes our SYSTEM racist? As opposed to individuals?
> 
> I can think of some things - the criminal justice system for example.  That would be a system that while not overtly racist, has ended up being racist in how things are handled.
Click to expand...


Why is it, even when you guys know racism exists that when we say the system is racist that we must always play 20 questions and then show you specifics? If you know it exists, then you've seen the specifics. The criminal justice system is the worst example you can use to claim something is not overtly racist.


----------



## gallantwarrior

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I ask you this, if I were white, and if I were to declare that I preferred to deal with white-only businesses, even going out of my way to do so, would you call that racist?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Depends on what your reasons were for doing it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's say I just really want to promote and strengthen the white community and see patronizing white businesses as a way of achieving this goal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then I wouldnt say it was racist. I would wonder why you thought you needed to do that since the white community is already in control of the government and the resources here in the US.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm just a regular guy who doesn't view myself as racist.  Most people are embedded in their own small community.


----------



## Coyote

..


IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> A racist system or that racism exists?
> 
> What specifically makes our system racist?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you believe that racism is gone?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Then why ask the question you asked?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because people can be racist, systems can be racists, policies and laws can be racist...it can be one, some or all.  So what makes our SYSTEM racist? As opposed to individuals?
> 
> I can think of some things - the criminal justice system for example.  That would be a system that while not overtly racist, has ended up being racist in how things are handled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is it, even when you guys know racism exists that when we say the system is racist that we must always play 20 questions and then show you specifics? If you know it exists, then you've seen the specifics. The criminal justice system is the worst example you can use to claim something is not overtly racist.
Click to expand...


Because people can say anything.  And if one part of the system is racist that doesn't mean the whole system is.  Earlier, I specfically said that the criminal justice system is racially biased and gave examples - so what exactly do you mean?


----------



## MaryL

I live next door to a Japanese person   that was put in a interment camp. He is still alive.  I don't live  next to any people   harmed, hurt  or gained anything by slavery that are still alive, though. Slavery ended 150 years ago. Only people profiting from that now are blacks. Alleging  racism has become quite an industry.


----------



## Coyote

MaryL said:


> I live next door to a Japanese person   that was put in a interment camp. He is still alive.  I don't live  next to any people   harmed, hurt  or gained anything by slavery that are still alive, though. Slavery ended 150 years ago. Only people profiting from that now are blacks. Racism has become quite an industry.



I agree...reparations should be made to survivors...not descendents.

However, racism isn't an industry it exists.  And it shouldn't be marginalized where it actually exists.


----------



## Asclepias

gallantwarrior said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
> I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
Click to expand...

Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> And...57 pages into this thread and I'm still waiting for some solid numbers.  Who should be paid how much?  Using current pay scales?  Using pay scales prevalent during the time that slaves were working?  We already know that A. believes that all current taxpayers should be made to contribute to paying retribution, regardless of their ancestors' place of origin, how or when they arrived in the US.  OK, we have a source.  But who should be paid reparations?  All people of color, regardless of whether they can prove their heritage having derived from slaves held in the US?  Any black person currently residing here, regardless of when their ancestors arrived?  And what percentage of their bloodline should derive from blacks, African or otherwise, would entitle them to reparations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
> I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
Click to expand...


Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.

But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
> I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
Click to expand...

Of course they were harmed. Mentally as well as economically.The value of reparations is something they could have used to give a better life to their descendants. Also some of the descendants of the Japanese received reparations.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats not racism Thats nationalism.  Racism was created by whites to justify chattel slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's not biology. We are not born a racists. Ethnocentrism is also of mistaken for racism. Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually...it is.  It's hardwired...but...malleable.  Neuroscience is fascinating.
> 
> Brain hardwired to stereotype
> 
> “Just because a stereotype is ingrained in your brain, it doesn’t make you racist or sexist. We are all subject to subconscious stereotypes but we can consciously overrule that."
> 
> Is racism hard-wired? Scans show people's brains respond more strongly to information that reinforces negative stereotypes
> 
> So there is primitive hardwiring...but it doesn't have to define us.  That is where learned behavior comes into being.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Racism is a learned behavior. We are talking about racism, not stereotyping. You can stereotype within the same race and the stereotype doesn't have to infer racial superiority.
> 
> Now how answering the question.* "Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?"*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I try to.
> 
> Conversely...have you yourself ever accepted whites as equal...?  Real friends?  Or do you treat them as the enemy.
Click to expand...


There is no conversely to be had here. Again, you guys try the false equivalence.  I grew up in a town 90 percent white and have whites that are childhood friends. Was married to a white lady, all of that. I asked what I did because when whites start talking about how people from all races can be racist it makes me wonder just how much thought you have given to understanding how others feel about how they have been treated by whites.

At some point in time whites are just going to have to bow their necks and understand the dfficult position they put themselves in. Always trying to turn things around on others when they talk to you about what whites need to do is not going to get anything done except keep hostility alive.


----------



## MaryL

Coyote said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I live next door to a Japanese person   that was put in a interment camp. He is still alive.  I don't live  next to any people   harmed, hurt  or gained anything by slavery that are still alive, though. Slavery ended 150 years ago. Only people profiting from that now are blacks. Racism has become quite an industry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree...reparations should be made to survivors...not descendents.
> 
> However, racism isn't an industry it exists.  And it shouldn't be marginalized where it actually exists.
Click to expand...

Well, well. Who are the survivors? Hmm. Slavery ended in 1865. Racism is being made into an industry of blame. I live with Vietnamese, and they got over wars and all sorts of outrages. To quote Vonnegut : So it goes...Blacks capitalize on their inability to accept the past. Boy howdy, do they!


----------



## Asclepias

MaryL said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I live next door to a Japanese person   that was put in a interment camp. He is still alive.  I don't live  next to any people   harmed, hurt  or gained anything by slavery that are still alive, though. Slavery ended 150 years ago. Only people profiting from that now are blacks. Racism has become quite an industry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree...reparations should be made to survivors...not descendents.
> 
> However, racism isn't an industry it exists.  And it shouldn't be marginalized where it actually exists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, well. Who are the survivors? Hmm. Slavery ended in 1865. Racism is being made into an industry of blame. I live with Vietnamese, and they got over wars and all sorts of outrages. To quote Vonnegut : So it goes...Blacks capitalize on their inability to accept the past. Boy howdy, do they!
Click to expand...

Sorry but we wont accept the notion that we are not owed reparations.  No amount guilt trippin or whining will change that.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
> I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course they were harmed. Mentally as well as economically.The value of reparations is something they could have used to give a better life to their descendants. Also some of the descendants of the Japanese received reparations.
Click to expand...

Which ones?


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree...it's not nationalism.  It's biology in part.  Racism exists everywhere independent of slavery.  Look at Japan and, how it views non Japanese "foreigners" for example.  "round eyes"....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it's not biology. We are not born a racists. Ethnocentrism is also of mistaken for racism. Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually...it is.  It's hardwired...but...malleable.  Neuroscience is fascinating.
> 
> Brain hardwired to stereotype
> 
> “Just because a stereotype is ingrained in your brain, it doesn’t make you racist or sexist. We are all subject to subconscious stereotypes but we can consciously overrule that."
> 
> Is racism hard-wired? Scans show people's brains respond more strongly to information that reinforces negative stereotypes
> 
> So there is primitive hardwiring...but it doesn't have to define us.  That is where learned behavior comes into being.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Racism is a learned behavior. We are talking about racism, not stereotyping. You can stereotype within the same race and the stereotype doesn't have to infer racial superiority.
> 
> Now how answering the question.* "Have you ever taken the time to think about how others might actually feel about how they have been treated by whites?"*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I try to.
> 
> Conversely...have you yourself ever accepted whites as equal...?  Real friends?  Or do you treat them as the enemy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no conversely to be had here. Again, you guys try the false equivalence.  I grew up in a town 90 percent white and have whites that are childhood friends. Was married to a white lady, all of that. I asked what I did because when whites start talking about how people from all races can be racist I makes me wonder just how much thought you have given to understanding how others feel about how they have been treated by whites.
> 
> At some point in time whites are just going to have to bow their necks and understand the dfficult position they put themselves in. Always trying to turn things around on others when they talk to you about what whites need to do is not going to get anything done except keep hostility alive.
Click to expand...


Yes.  There is a conversely.

Anyone can be racist.

Why do I have to bow my neck?

What "difficult position" did I put myself in?

I have no desire for hostility but neither will I take blame for things I did not do.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
> 
> 
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course they were harmed. Mentally as well as economically.The value of reparations is something they could have used to give a better life to their descendants. Also some of the descendants of the Japanese received reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which ones?
Click to expand...

One that I know personally and a few others whos parents had passed before payments were made.


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
> 
> 
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course they were harmed. Mentally as well as economically.The value of reparations is something they could have used to give a better life to their descendants. Also some of the descendants of the Japanese received reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which ones?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One that I know personally and a few others whos parents had passed before payments were made.
Click to expand...


I suspect those were isolated and particular cases - for example, the reparations were already in the works when the person passed.  I do know there was no wholesale reparation made to descendents nor would I support it.


----------



## MaryL

Blacks sit on their  asses, hate whites, blame whites for their ennui, and then want to get paid for it. Ok, I am black, I want my free money for being a victim. I am a  lazy ass twit. I am black, where is my free money? I earned it, because of slavery and things I never had anything to do with.


----------



## Coyote

MaryL said:


> Blacks sit on their  asses, hate whites, blame whites for their ennui, and then want to get paid for it. Ok, I am black, I want my free money for being a victim. I am a  lazy ass twit. I am black, where is my free money? I earned it, because of slavery and things I never had anything to do with.



No they don't.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well...here are some ideas...
> 
> Slavery Reparations Could Cost Up to $14 Trillion, According to New Calculation
> 
> Calculating Reparations: $1.5 Million for Each Slave Descendant in the U.S | Black Agenda Report
> 
> This is what reparations could actually look like in America
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
> I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
Click to expand...


Yes we do have the right to reparations. Nobody got anything after slavery but the whites slaveowner who got reparations for the freed slaves they lost.  Go study the impact of slavery on blacks today. Because you are opposing something based on not knowing why.


----------



## Asclepias

MaryL said:


> Blacks sit on their  asses, hate whites, blame whites for their ennui, and then want to get paid for it. Ok, I am black, I want my free money for being a victim. I am a  lazy ass twit. I am black, where is my free money? I earned it, because of slavery and things I never had anything to do with.


White belief system in the flesh.


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course they were harmed. Mentally as well as economically.The value of reparations is something they could have used to give a better life to their descendants. Also some of the descendants of the Japanese received reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which ones?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One that I know personally and a few others whos parents had passed before payments were made.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I suspect those were isolated and particular cases - for example, the reparations were already in the works when the person passed.  I do know there was no wholesale reparation made to descendents nor would I support it.
Click to expand...

Yeah I just checked the act and it claims no reparations were to be paid to descendants. Weird how some of them got it anyway.


----------



## IM2

MaryL said:


> Blacks sit on their  asses, hate whites, blame whites for their ennui, and then want to get paid for it. Ok, I am black, I want my free money for being a victim. I am a  lazy ass twit. I am black, where is my free money? I earned it, because of slavery and things I never had anything to do with.



Uneducated whites use this argument. And when I say uneducated, I mean this is a person who may not have a high school diploma.


----------



## Asclepias

IM2 said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blacks sit on their  asses, hate whites, blame whites for their ennui, and then want to get paid for it. Ok, I am black, I want my free money for being a victim. I am a  lazy ass twit. I am black, where is my free money? I earned it, because of slavery and things I never had anything to do with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uneducated whites use this argument. And when I say uneducated, I mean this is a person who may not have a high school diploma.
Click to expand...

Excellent example of the white belief system I pointed out to Coyote.


----------



## MaryL

I am black, I want my free money!  Reparations for slavery. My great grand daddy, uncle or mammy  was worth 10 bazillion dollars. Send your guilt soaked checks to me, MaryL. It will solve everything. I have a bridge in Brooklyn too, and it will only cost you whatever you got.


----------



## IM2

MaryL said:


> I am black, I want my free money!  Reparations for slavery. My great grand daddy, uncle or mammy  was worth 10 bazillion dollars. Send your guilt soaked checks to me, MaryL. It will solve everything. I have a bridge in Brooklyn too, and it will only cost you whatever you got.



And do you think repeating this makes you look more intelligent?


----------



## Coyote

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they were harmed. Mentally as well as economically.The value of reparations is something they could have used to give a better life to their descendants. Also some of the descendants of the Japanese received reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which ones?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One that I know personally and a few others whos parents had passed before payments were made.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I suspect those were isolated and particular cases - for example, the reparations were already in the works when the person passed.  I do know there was no wholesale reparation made to descendents nor would I support it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah I just checked the act and it claims no reparations were to be paid to descendants. Weird how some of them got it anyway.
Click to expand...


Might just be that the process was in place when the person died?


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, Coyote.  Those are interesting articles and do provide information about how reparations might be calculated and why the authors deem reparations necessary.
> I still do not agree that every man, woman, and child who pays taxes should be forced to contribute to fund these payments.  Many later immigrants came here penniless, with the clothes on their backs, and yet they managed to improve their lots in life.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes we do have the right to reparations. Nobody got anything after slavery but the whites slaveowner who got reparations for the freed slaves they lost.  Go study the impact of slavery on blacks today. Because you are opposing something based on not knowing why.
Click to expand...


Woman have been historically underpaid for the same work as men.  Am I entitled to reparations because my great grandmother was underpaid for her labor?


----------



## IM2




----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they were harmed. Mentally as well as economically.The value of reparations is something they could have used to give a better life to their descendants. Also some of the descendants of the Japanese received reparations.
> 
> 
> 
> Which ones?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One that I know personally and a few others whos parents had passed before payments were made.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I suspect those were isolated and particular cases - for example, the reparations were already in the works when the person passed.  I do know there was no wholesale reparation made to descendents nor would I support it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah I just checked the act and it claims no reparations were to be paid to descendants. Weird how some of them got it anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Might just be that the process was in place when the person died?
Click to expand...

I'm going to check.  I could have sworn they told me their parents had died a year before the payout.


----------



## IM2

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
> 
> 
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes we do have the right to reparations. Nobody got anything after slavery but the whites slaveowner who got reparations for the freed slaves they lost.  Go study the impact of slavery on blacks today. Because you are opposing something based on not knowing why.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Woman have been historically underpaid for the same work as men.  Am I entitled to reparations because my great grandmother was underpaid for her labor?
Click to expand...


You do realize that's a stupid ass question. Right?


----------



## Coyote

IM2 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
> 
> 
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  It's not.
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes we do have the right to reparations. Nobody got anything after slavery but the whites slaveowner who got reparations for the freed slaves they lost.  Go study the impact of slavery on blacks today. Because you are opposing something based on not knowing why.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Woman have been historically underpaid for the same work as men.  Am I entitled to reparations because my great grandmother was underpaid for her labor?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You do realize that's a stupid ass question. Right?
Click to expand...


----------



## Asclepias

Coyote said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you agree that the Japanese had a right to get reparations from every man, woman, and child that paid taxes?
> 
> 
> 
> Since the government forced those people into internment camps, that makes it government responsibility to repair the harm done to them.  You realize that the US government also forced Alaskan Natives into internment camps during WWII, don't you?  Blacks released from slavery subsequent to the end of the Civil War were also provided the opportunity to claim reparations.  In that sense, the government fulfilled its obligation to them as it did to both Japanese-Americans and Alaskan Natives.  But the slaves whose descendants you would recompense with taxpayer money were traded and owned by individuals.  I have proposed a fair and equitable means of establishing a fund financed by the descendants of slave traders/owners based on your own definition for establishing the recipients of such funds.  Any and all individuals who can be proved to have descended (within a certain degree of consanguinity) from persons who traded or owned black slaves in the US should be required to contribute to a reparation fund proportionate to the participation of their ancestors in the use of black slaves.  You appear to feel that such a fund would be inadequate to meet your (as representative of established recipients) demands.  Hence, you would prefer to hit up the Federal government because they have much deeper pockets.  In essence, it isn't the principle of the thing, it boils down to how much can you get from what source.  Your concept of reparations isn't a principled extraction of what is "owed" to specified recipients but is basically a shake down of the American taxpayer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do you think the government got the money to pay the Japanese? Blacks never got any reparations. If they were offered reparations why didnt any of them know about it?  No the government never fulfilled its obligation. In what world did this happen?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes we do have the right to reparations. Nobody got anything after slavery but the whites slaveowner who got reparations for the freed slaves they lost.  Go study the impact of slavery on blacks today. Because you are opposing something based on not knowing why.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Woman have been historically underpaid for the same work as men.  Am I entitled to reparations because my great grandmother was underpaid for her labor?
Click to expand...

Was it legalized by the federal government? If so yes. If not you can (or should be able to) sue the people that underpaid her.

Walmart could face a huge class action lawsuit from its female employees


----------



## IM2

Was she forced to do the labor against her will or did she apply for the job?


----------



## MaryL

IM2 said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am black, I want my free money!  Reparations for slavery. My great grand daddy, uncle or mammy  was worth 10 bazillion dollars. Send your guilt soaked checks to me, MaryL. It will solve everything. I have a bridge in Brooklyn too, and it will only cost you whatever you got.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And do you think repeating this makes you look more intelligent?
Click to expand...

I learn from my mistakes, unlike you.  Where are YOU going with this?


----------



## IM2

MaryL said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am black, I want my free money!  Reparations for slavery. My great grand daddy, uncle or mammy  was worth 10 bazillion dollars. Send your guilt soaked checks to me, MaryL. It will solve everything. I have a bridge in Brooklyn too, and it will only cost you whatever you got.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And do you think repeating this makes you look more intelligent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I learn from my mistakes, unlike you.  Where are YOU going with this?
Click to expand...


The only person making mistakes here is you.


----------



## Asclepias

MaryL said:


> IM2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am black, I want my free money!  Reparations for slavery. My great grand daddy, uncle or mammy  was worth 10 bazillion dollars. Send your guilt soaked checks to me, MaryL. It will solve everything. I have a bridge in Brooklyn too, and it will only cost you whatever you got.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And do you think repeating this makes you look more intelligent?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I learn from my mistakes, unlike you.  Where are YOU going with this?
Click to expand...

You havent learned from your mistakes. In fact you have gotten worse. Youre dumber than when I first joined the forum.


----------



## Montrovant

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Slaves for the most part didn't get reparations.  Few got the 40 acres and a mule biz.
> 
> But descendents don't have any right to reparations - why would they?  They were not directly harmed.  None of the descendents of the interned Japanese got reparations did they?
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they were harmed. Mentally as well as economically.The value of reparations is something they could have used to give a better life to their descendants. Also some of the descendants of the Japanese received reparations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which ones?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One that I know personally and a few others whos parents had passed before payments were made.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I suspect those were isolated and particular cases - for example, the reparations were already in the works when the person passed.  I do know there was no wholesale reparation made to descendents nor would I support it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah I just checked the act and it claims no reparations were to be paid to descendants. Weird how some of them got it anyway.
Click to expand...


This article says some heirs got reparations:  Wwii Reparations: Japanese-American Internees | Democracy Now!

But this one says checks are mailed to survivors, nothing about heirs: Payments to WWII Internees to Begin :  Reparations: The budget agreement clears the way for the program. The oldest survivors will be the first to receive the $20,000 checks.

The second article does mention that the act was authorized in 1988, but funds weren't allocated until later, and that the payments would be made over a 2-3 year period.  Perhaps one or more survivors died after having been authorized for payment, and that's why the heirs got it?  Just a guess.


----------



## MaryL

Back in say, 1961 and my father and a next door neighbor, a black guy I remember this trip  we took going down to the farmers market  together to get eggs in lower down town Denver. In a Cadillac  Brougham with big fins.     No segregation, my dad was like Archie Bunker, accept he wasn't a total asshole. Actually he  was a push over. The black guy was a veteran, to. Birds of a feather...race added up to nothing.


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then conduct a seance and discuss the matter with their ancestors.
> 
> 
> 
> Why?  Comparing slavery to free labor is like comparing concentration camps to immigrsnt detainment centers.  False moral equivalency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who said the labor was free?
> Does your local Walmat feed, clothe and house their employees?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Substandard food, forced breeding, brutal whippings, substandard housing and white male right to rape...sounds like the owners took far more than labor.  I had no idea thete were slavery deniers like there are holocast deniers.  That is a new one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just like most Black areas today with all of their freedoms going to waste.
> I’m not denying slavery; I’m denying the revisionist view of it lying only on all White people and asking why they haven’t taken advantage of the opportunity to catch up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly what "revisionist view" are you talking about?  You're comparing it to wage labor...disregarding the very elemental fact of liberty.
Click to expand...

Are you awake?
No African families sold their family members to Dutch traders because someone posted a web page that someone conjured up.
Seriously?
Blacks didn't migrate up North to Republican cities when they were offered financial incentives?
NYS didn't go from Republican to Democrat due to welfare and food stamps?
Seriously?
Blacks haven't created one area in 50 years that you would drive through after dark.
I'm bored hearing from two White hating Blacks how Whitey has held them down when other groups created their own successful neighborhoods and a generation later were welcome on Wall Street because Corporate America knew they wouldn't hold a protest if they didn't continuously jump undeservedly to the front of the line.


----------



## Indeependent

Asclepias said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> That was the past.  You're dealing with a whole different breed nowadays, as we all are.
> 
> 
> 
> Its not just the past. Its the present and future. There are plenty of Blacks like myself that patronize Black businesses before ever going outside our community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Understandable, if there are black businesses able to address you needs within the community.  I also prefer to patronize local businesses but do not limit myself.  Fortunately, I live in a community that includes representatives of many nationalities, races, social groups, etc.  I select the businesses I patronize based on references or personal experience, not solely one specific identifier.  Unless the community within you reside is predominantly black and you have no other choice, you might be missing better service or products if you use only the skin color of the proprietor as the sole determining factor of your patronage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disagree. I dont have a problem with spending more money to get an item from a Black business even if its all the way across the country. The internet has given me access to products created by Black people and owned by Black people.  My money is held in a Black bank.  All of my personal care items are provided by Black businesses even my toilet paper. I understand what you are saying about service or quality of product.  So far I havent had any issues. If I had a problem with service or quality  I would try to work with the Black business instead of just dropping it like I would a non Black business. I understand as other* Black people should understand that in some instances we may need to take a few steps and sacrifice so we can move ahead as a group*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's the great thing about this country.  We're free to support what we wish - whether it's minority owned business', green business' or local economies.
> 
> But are they are group?  Isn't that the mistake the Dems make?  Assuming they are one voting block?  Don't their needs and goals vary like white people?  What I support is completely different than what whites in rural Alabama support.
> 
> The Diversity Of Black Political Views
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The mistake the Dems have made is not fulfilling their promises in a speedy manner or sometimes not at all.  I dont have a problem with Blacks being one voting bloc. Thats how you concentrate and wield political power.  Not all Blacks have the same view just like any other race. However if they wish to see real significant change some of those views have to be put to the side in order to concentrate power.
Click to expand...

Without Blacks, Democrats have no voting Blov.
Take a huy like the dearly departed Boss.
He kept his pants on and went to school and became a successful businessman.
He's laughing at you from the great beyond.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

dave p said:


> If you want to hold one country responsible for harm caused, all countries that participated should be held responsible.


That is not what you are saying. I am immune to your forced fallacies, akin to those of an AM radio talk host.

What you are saying is that we should do nothing, if we can't hold foreign countries just as accountable. That is, of course, absurd.


----------



## dave p

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to hold one country responsible for harm caused, all countries that participated should be held responsible.
> 
> 
> 
> That is not what you are saying. I am immune to your forced fallacies, akin to those of an AM radio talk host.
> 
> What you are saying is that we should do nothing, if we can't hold foreign countries just as accountable. That is, of course, absurd.
Click to expand...

I never said that. I don’t believe we should do anything regardless. Those that are only holding the U.S. responsible are unreasonable.


----------



## MaryL

It seems the that rich white plantation owners from 150 years ago aren't the only ones that profited  from slavery.  Faux black intellectuals as well as race hucksters are making pretty good profit off of this issue, too. $$$ I am sure they are all motivated by the purest of intensions as long as it pays off.


----------



## IM2

dave p said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to hold one country responsible for harm caused, all countries that participated should be held responsible.
> 
> 
> 
> That is not what you are saying. I am immune to your forced fallacies, akin to those of an AM radio talk host.
> 
> What you are saying is that we should do nothing, if we can't hold foreign countries just as accountable. That is, of course, absurd.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said that. I don’t believe we should do anything regardless. Those that are only holding the U.S. responsible are unreasonable.
Click to expand...


----------



## IM2

MaryL said:


> It seems the that rich white plantation owners from 150 years ago aren't the only ones that profited  from slavery.  Faux black intellectuals as well as race hucksters are making pretty good profit off of this issue, too. $$$ I am sure they are all motivated by the purest of intensions as long as it pays off.


----------



## dave p

IM2 said:


> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dave p said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to hold one country responsible for harm caused, all countries that participated should be held responsible.
> 
> 
> 
> That is not what you are saying. I am immune to your forced fallacies, akin to those of an AM radio talk host.
> 
> What you are saying is that we should do nothing, if we can't hold foreign countries just as accountable. That is, of course, absurd.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I never said that. I don’t believe we should do anything regardless. Those that are only holding the U.S. responsible are unreasonable.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Thank you for the selfie.


----------

