Zone1 Broad-brush reparations to all blacks is unconstituional

[Lisa558]

They did, and it is a shameful period in our history (see my signature which I’ve had for years). However they were not American citizens at the time, they were desperate immigrants seeking asylum.

No they did not get reparations. Only if they were sent to the camps and survived. If they did not, but ended up elsewhere in Europe and were sheltered by sympathetic people.

 

[Mac-7]

You can assume what you want, but I am the one bringing evidence. You're just posting what you believe and your belief is devoid of any factual foundation. All your argument boils down to is "I'm white, this is what I believe, therefore I am right". That doesn't cut it in a debate. You must support your premise with facts and you have not.

I say blacks are owed reparations by every level of government in this country and I have backed up my premise with government policies that have harmed blacks. I have shown where government policies benefitted whites while excluuding blacks. I have shown where white racism has continued impacting blacks in this century. You say we don't and can't show anything. So you've lost this debate.

Government policies today are harming whites

Affirmative Action is one example

 

[Lisa558]

Nobody has made such a statement.

It’s been implied repeatedly. When I’ve said Jews have overcome antisemitism to become successful, IM2 falsely says that Jews got reparations.

 

[Foxfyre]

Freedom of travel within the country and equal protection under law are pretty fundamental. In 1961, what laws existed that prevented YOU from staying at hotels, eating at diners or even being able to buy gas based on your skin color?

The attitude 60 years ago and before that is that there is no constitutional right to have another person provide you with any product or service. The 'we reserve the right to refuse service to anybody' was allowed all proprietors as their unalienable right to associate with whomever they chose to associate and to have authority over their own businesses.

Right or wrong that was the American culture at that time and it provided a lot of lucrative cottage industries to black people who stepped up and ran businesses utilized by other black people. A white person was likely no more welcome in a black club than was a black person in a white one.

All that ended with the Civil Rights Act of 1964--60 YEARS AGO!!!!!--and the huge majority of injustices were made illegal everywhere. And effort was made by the government to give previously disadvantaged black people opportunity for better education, access to jobs, the right to eat at any diner etc. etc. etc. That was the reparations that was needed at that time.

That some black people chose not to take advantage of the opportunities opened to them is pretty much nobody's fault but theirs. That white and black people now presume black people are so damaged and fragile that they are due reparations for policies that existed 60 years ago is hugely insulting to all black people who have integrity, ethics, and an understanding of what it is to be an American.

 

[Foxfyre]

He has and will continue to have more credibility than you if for no other reason than he is much more knowledgeable, not just about reparations, but regarding the history of the United States, both the history that is taught and African American history which is often left out. You know, the history that demonstrates why reparations should be considered because that history shows how our government favored and assisted its whites citizens often at the expense of the Black citizens.

You keep playing the role of a victim who will be required to dip into your retirement fund or offer up any other assets you hold in order to help the government fund it's show of making amends and apologizing for all of the human right abuses it allowed to be carried out in its name and with its full legal permission.

I will add you to those who cannot make a coherent or reasoned argument but accuse others, go ad hominem, assume things about those with whom you disagree. And until you learn to avoid doing that I won't be responding to you further either.

 

[Lisa558]

FYI to the numbnuts, Jim Crow laws were NOT nationwide. They existed as the prerogative of those states that had them and were not uniform among the various states who had them. Plessy v Ferguson upheld that Jim Crow laws did not violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution so long as imposed segregation held to a separate but equal public services policy for all.

These Democrats are arguing that ALL blacks alive in the Jim Crowe era, even if they weren’t subject to its restrictions, deserve reparations simply by virtue of them being born and being black.

I bet you if you asked an 80-year-old black man from New York, who went to school with whites, played with them, went to movies with them, etc., and then enjoyed a free college education courtesy of taxpayers, and as a result lived a comfortable life of a professional whether he wanted “reparations” from this country, he’d turn it down.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

[snipped] But black people who insist they are due reparations because black people were mistreated in the past is a whole different can of worms that should be quickly dispatched and shown for the absurdity that it is.

IT'S NOT SOLELY BASED ON THE PAST!

The laws that the Civil Right Act of 1964 nullified did NOTHING to change the hearts and minds of racist members of society. Therefore since laws can only change what is and is no longer lawful, people have the ability to ignore them as they see fit and that's exactly what they've done.

This means that we still have people who treat Black Americans with the same hatred and disdain due to our race that we were subjected to prior to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Accordingly, this means that "the past" that you all keep referring to includes every single year since the abolishment of slavery in 1865 by the ratification of the 13th Amendment until the year of the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 99 years later, which officially (legally) ended Jim Crow but realistically includes every year since, up to 2023, soon to be 2024 with no end of the violations in sight.

You all keep referring to WHEN the laws changed (Jim Crow) with no thought at all on how the prohibited thoughts, attitudes and behavior have not changed at all when it comes to certain segments of society.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I will add you to those who cannot make a coherent or reasoned argument but accuse others, go ad hominem, assume things about those with whom you disagree. And until you learn to avoid doing that I won't be responding to you further either.

I've known IM2 since March 2018, you just showed up last week and have had no qualms about demonstrating your lack of knowledge on the subject matter at hand.

All you have is your opinion which I've explained repeatedly can't be applied like a civil lawsuit to this situation so please by all means put me on ignore.

 

[Foxfyre]

These Democrats are arguing that ALL blacks alive in the Jim Crowe era, even if they weren’t subject to its restrictions, deserve reparations simply by virtue of them being born and being black.

I bet you if you asked an 80-year-old black man from New York, who went to school with whites, played with them, went to movies with them, etc., and then enjoyed a free college education courtesy of taxpayers, and as a result lived a comfortable life of a professional whether he wanted “reparations” from this country, he’d turn it down.

As well he should. It would be insulting to his integrity and sense of right and wrong.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Every house and business destroyed was bought for a fair price through eminent domain. If anything, the destruction ADDED to generational wealth since most of those structures were worth more than they were originally purchased for. It's not like the government just ran bulldozers through neighborhoods.

Eminent domain was the pretext that the county used to acquire that beachfront property from that that Black family in Redondo Beach, California (I'm think it was Redondo). But the point is it was part of a scheme of acquire the property.

Also when the property is acquired from people who don't have the money to fight the government they pretty much have to take whatever the government deems "fair".

 

[IM2]

"You aren’t doing blacks any favor by pretending that Jews, in the midst of the Holocaust and not knowing if their relatives were dead or alive, became successful due to reparations. They became successful for the traits I listed above."

Favors for blacks? What racist arrogance. You have assumed blacks do not have the listed qualities yet you are barking about some imaginary claim? The white Jews that came to America after WW2 recieved reparations from Germany and were able to participate in the government programs which at that time, excluded blacks. This assistance certainly helped white Jews with whatever qualities you have decided made them sucessfull and that you determined blacks don't have.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Blacks who lived in the South chose to do so

Have you ever had to uproot your life and move hundreds of miles away on the chance that you will have a better life? Remember the racism that Blacks faced in the U.S. was legal EVERYWHERE in the continental United States.

 

[Lisa558]

IT'S NOT SOLELY BASED ON THE PAST!

The laws that the Civil Right Act of 1964 nullified did NOTHING to change the hearts and minds of racist members of society. Therefore since laws can only change what is and is no longer lawful, people have the ability to ignore them as they see fit and that's exactly what they've done.

This means that we still have people who treat Black Americans with the same hatred and disdain due to our race that we were subjected to prior to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Accordingly, this means that "the past" that you all keep referring to includes every single year since the abolishment of slavery in 1865 by the ratification of the 13th Amendment until the year of the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 99 years later, which officially (legally) ended Jim Crow but realistically includes every year since, up to 2023, soon to be 2024 with no end of the violations in sight.

You all keep referring to WHEN the laws changed (Jim Crow) with no thought at all on how the prohibited thoughts, attitudes and behavior have not changed at all when it comes to certain segments of society.

There’s no such thing as prohibited thoughts and attitudes. You now are claiming that blacks should all get reparations because of thoughts and attitudes?!

 

[IM2]

As well he should. It would be insulting to his integrity and sense of right and wrong.

All blacks faced Jim Crow restrictions. I don't think you want to talk to the average 80 year old black man about this. I am black, I know 80 year old black men. Lissa would be made to cry if she approached one of them with her malarkey. So would you.

 

[IM2]

Eminent domain was the pretext that the county used to acquire that beachfront property from that that Black family in Redondo Beach, California (I'm think it was Redondo). But the point is it was part of a scheme of acquire the property.

Also when the property is acquired from people who don't have the money to fight the government they pretty much have to take whatever the government deems "fair".

That fool doesn't know what he's talking about.

 

[Lisa558]

Have you ever had to uproot your life and move hundreds of miles away on the chance that you will have a better life? Remember the racism that Blacks faced in the U.S. was legal EVERYWHERE in the continental United States.

My father has to do this very thing when the antisemitism in his city was so bad he couldn’t get a job. Left his home and parents to embark on a better life. Blacks in his college class were free to do the same of they faced racism.

 

[el midgetron]

In what form? I didn't get any. Did you get a check during the COVID lock down or don't you consider that a form of welfare?

I provided the statistics and never claimed 100% of black people received welfare assistance. Just that by race, black people have disproportionately been the recipients of government assistance. Over the course of 60 years, that is a disproportionate sum in the trillions of dollars.

That is fact and it counters IM2’s point about white people getting government assistance that black people were not entitled to.

 

[el midgetron]

In what form? I didn't get any. Did you get a check during the COVID lock down or don't you consider that a form of welfare?

There is a distinct difference between the Covid funds and welfare. If the government closes your business and prevents you from working, then you are entitled to be compensated for income lost.

Not really sure what the relevance of your point is since everyone, regardless of the color of their skin, who was working was eligible for Covid relieve.

 

[IM2]

The irony of people given all they have because of the color of their skin lecturing how it is wrong for others to ask for what they have been given should not escape anyone here.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Eminent domain was the pretext that the county used to acquire that beachfront property from that that Black family in Redondo Beach, California (I'm think it was Redondo). But the point is it was part of a scheme of acquire the property.

Also when the property is acquired from people who don't have the money to fight the government they pretty much have to take whatever the government deems "fair".

You really can’t fight an eminent domain seizure. About all you can do is quibble about the price.