The value of slavery?

[Indeependent]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?

We are talking about human rights violations. Understand?

In Africa?

 

[Indeependent]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

What determines law?

 

[Montrovant]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?

We are talking about human rights violations. Understand?

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]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

 

[Asclepias]

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

 

[Indeependent]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

I do agree that Blacks should never have been considered chattel.

 

[Indeependent]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

Are the examples on the Internet?

 

[Asclepias]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

Are the examples on the Internet?

Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

So, in what year were your human rights violated?

 

[Asclepias]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

So, in what year were you human rights violated?

What does that have to do with topic?

 

[Indeependent]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

Are the examples on the Internet?

Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"

Precedents concern land theft.

 

[IM2]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?

We are talking about human rights violations. Understand?

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.

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]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

So, in what year were you human rights violated?

What does that have to do with topic?

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]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

Are the examples on the Internet?

Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"

Precedents concern land theft.

Show us in the definition of "precedent" where it only applies to land theft.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

What are the relevant laws regarding slavery reparations?

We are talking about human rights violations. Understand?

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.

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.

To be awarded damages, you have to prove you were damaged.

 

[Indeependent]

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.

Are the examples on the Internet?

Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"

Precedents concern land theft.

Show us in the definition of precedent where it only applies to land theft.

Did you bother reading the cases?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

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.

Are the examples on the Internet?

Yes. Just google "reparations paid by the us"

Precedents concern land theft.

Show us in the definition of "precedent" where it only applies to land theft.

Are you now claiming you had your land stolen?

 

[Asclepias]

The law determines what matters in this case. Not what people think.

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.

So, in what year were you human rights violated?

What does that have to do with topic?

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?