What policies should be implemented to address racism in the country?

[USAF 2023]

Try for some consistency. I’m talking about those who survived Jim Crowe, not descendents. Now try again.

You’re the one who mentioned the Jews. Now try again

 

[USAF 2023]

Yes you are playing semantics because the people in concentration camps were victims.

YAWN… Read my response to Coyote. Ann Frank and her family can’t receive reparations, can they?

 

[Paul Essien]

I LOVE IT

Burn it down. Cheeky bastards

 

[Coyote]

You’re the one who mentioned the Jews. Now try again

We seem to be two ships sailing past in the night, completely missing something in the convo. You seem to keep thinking I am talking about reparations for ALL blacks, including descendents and you keep bringing up how that wasn’t the case with Germany and Jews. I keep saying I am only talking about those people, still alive, who were alive in the US under Jim Crowe.

Am I missing something you have said?

 

[Coyote]

I can’t believe you don’t honestly understand! Ann Frank, her Mother and Sister died in those Camps and can’t receive reparations, can they? Of course they were Victims! However, OTTO FRANK who lived was also a Victim and would have been AUTOMATICALLY eligible!
Hypothetically, say they had another child who managed to leave the Country before they went into hiding. They would NOT be automatically eligible

I see what your saying now, and that would have to be a decision made by whatever body set the rules for reparation.

 

[USAF 2023]

I see what your saying now, and that would have to be a decision made by whatever body set the rules for reparation.

Exactly!!!!!

 

[Lisa558]

We seem to be two ships sailing past in the night, completely missing something in the convo. You seem to keep thinking I am talking about reparations for ALL blacks, including descendents and you keep bringing up how that wasn’t the case with Germany and Jews. I keep saying I am only talking about those people, still alive, who were alive in the US under Jim Crowe.

Am I missing something you have said?

So are we in agreement then that only those blacks DIRECTLY impacted by racism - the Jim Crowe survivors - are those for whom a case for reparations can be made? And that blacks generations removed from slavery, who never even knew their ancestors, do not?

Direct survivors:

- Holocaust survivors who made it through the camps
- Japanese Americans imprisoned
- Jim Crowe survivors

Others, either descendants, or in the case of Jews, family members who suffered a terrible loss of their loved ones, never received reparations. Similarly, descendants of slaves should not either.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

So are we in agreement then that only those blacks DIRECTLY impacted by racism - the Jim Crowe survivors - are those for whom a case for reparations can be made? And that blacks generations removed from slavery, who never even knew their ancestors, do not?

Direct survivors:

- Holocaust survivors who made it through the camps
- Japanese Americans imprisoned
- Jim Crowe survivors

Others, either descendants, or in the case of Jews, family members who suffered a terrible loss of their loved ones, never received reparations. Similarly, descendants of slaves should not either.

I think it goes without saying, too, that these elderly recipients would be limited to those who lived in states that actually had Jim Crow laws on the books.

In any case, none of posters here demanding reparations would be included.

 

[Lisa558]

I think it goes without saying, too, that these elderly recipients would be limited to those who lived in states that actually had Jim Crow laws on the books.

In any case, none of posters here demanding reparations would be included.

Yes, I thought that would be obvious, but of course only those blacks who lived in those states. The black children who went to public school with my parents, and lived in their neighborhoods, in 1940s NYC, for example, would not be eligible.

 

[task0778]

I think it goes without saying, too, that these elderly recipients would be limited to those who lived in states that actually had Jim Crow laws on the books.

I wonder if it is even possible to determine who lived where prior to 1965. What if you were born in Michigan and your family moved to Alabama when you were a baby, you should get a check, right? What if you were born in Alabama and your family moved to Michigan when you were a baby, you shouldn't get a check, right? Many probably didn't file a tax return, and who keeps their returns going back nearly 60 years? Does the IRS keep returns that far back? How else would the gov't know who should get a check and who shouldn't?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Yes, I thought that would be obvious, but of course only those blacks who lived in those states. The black children who went to public school with my parents, and lived in their neighborhoods, in 1940s NYC, for example, would not be eligible.

Nothing is ever obvious to those whose agenda requires them to be extremely selective and extremely inconsistant in the way they advance their talking points.

 

[Lisa558]

I wonder if it is even possible to determine who lived where prior to 1965. What if you were born in Michigan and your family moved to Alabama when you were a baby, you should get a check, right? What if you were born in Alabama and your family moved to Michigan when you were a baby, you shouldn't get a check, right? Many probably didn't file a tax return, and who keeps their returns going back nearly 60 years? Does the IRS keep returns that far back? How else would the gov't know who should get a check and who shouldn't?

Yeah, it would be a logistical nightmare.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I wonder if it is even possible to determine who lived where prior to 1965. What if you were born in Michigan and your family moved to Alabama when you were a baby, you should get a check, right? What if you were born in Alabama and your family moved to Michigan when you were a baby, you shouldn't get a check, right? Many probably didn't file a tax return, and who keeps their returns going back nearly 60 years? Does the IRS keep returns that far back? How else would the gov't know who should get a check and who shouldn't?

You are intelligent, and so you ask valid questions. Yes, this suggestion would involve the creation of a massive bureaucracy to determine the answers to all these questions.

Unfortunately, those who are driven by an extreme agenda never ask questions. They merely repeat the dogma that, at least to them, represents all the answers.

 

[USAF 2023]

We seem to be two ships sailing past in the night, completely missing something in the convo. You seem to keep thinking I am talking about reparations for ALL blacks, including descendents and you keep bringing up how that wasn’t the case with Germany and Jews. I keep saying I am only talking about those people, still alive, who were alive in the US under Jim Crowe.

Am I missing something you have said?

I wonder if it is even possible to determine who lived where prior to 1965. What if you were born in Michigan and your family moved to Alabama when you were a baby, you should get a check, right? What if you were born in Alabama and your family moved to Michigan when you were a baby, you shouldn't get a check, right? Many probably didn't file a tax return, and who keeps their returns going back nearly 60 years? Does the IRS keep returns that far back? How else would the gov't know who should get a check and who shouldn't?

I honestly believe that is some got it and others didn’t; there would be a CIVIL WAR in this Country regardless of the logic in reasoning

 

[Coyote]

I honestly believe that is some got it and others didn’t; there would be a CIVIL WAR in this Country regardless of the logic in reasoning

Then the real question should be “why”?

Even when we set up the same restrictions as the other groups who received reparations
1. A distinct event/set of laws that create the wrong
2. Not multigenerational
3. Limited to only those directly effected

You still come with a resounding “no”.

 

[Coyote]

I wonder if it is even possible to determine who lived where prior to 1965. What if you were born in Michigan and your family moved to Alabama when you were a baby, you should get a check, right? What if you were born in Alabama and your family moved to Michigan when you were a baby, you shouldn't get a check, right? Many probably didn't file a tax return, and who keeps their returns going back nearly 60 years? Does the IRS keep returns that far back? How else would the gov't know who should get a check and who shouldn't?

Even though some states did not have actual Jim Crowe laws, the often had policies in place that had the same effect.

For example:

California’s history of anti-Blackness hides beneath its progressive reputation - High Country News

A new history of the state traces early civil rights battles spearheaded by Black activists.

www.hcn.org

or segregated beaches

Americaâs segregated shores: beaches' long history as a racial battleground

For decades officials imposed regulations to restrict African Americans’ use of public beaches – and the fight for equal access is far from over

www.theguardian.com

National Parks, while federal, still adhered to Jim Crowe in the states where those laws were.

How The National Park Service Grappled With Segregation During The 20th Century

Separate campgrounds, dining rooms, picnic grounds, and restrooms. Maps and signs that directed blacks to destinations away from whites. This was the landscape of segregation in some national parks during that divisive chapter of the country’s history. While the signs have been taken down and...

www.nationalparkstraveler.org

In addition, Jim Crowe didn’t just effect those who lived in a state but anyone who had to travel through it. I don’t you need to sort out who lived where and for how long.

 

[Coyote]

You are intelligent, and so you ask valid questions. Yes, this suggestion would involve the creation of a massive bureaucracy to determine the answers to all these questions.

Unfortunately, those who are driven by an extreme agenda never ask questions. They merely repeat the dogma that, at least to them, represents all the answers.

I don’t think I’d consider it an extreme agenda, that seems to be the frequent fall back, plus there is some good discussion on. There are some valid points for reparations, the devil is in the details.

 

[task0778]

In addition, Jim Crowe didn’t just effect those who lived in a state but anyone who had to travel through it. I don’t you need to sort out who lived where and for how long.

I do not agree, and I'm sure there are many others who don't either. There are a lot of people living today in non-Jim Crow states that will not be pleased if their federal gov't gives their tax dollars to people who were born or lived in Jim Crow states, much less African Americans who lived anywhere is the US. As divisive as we already are, this is definitely not going to help the situation, and in my view is quite likely to acerbate it.

 

[Lisa558]

Even though some states did not have actual Jim Crowe laws, the often had policies in place that had the same effect.

For example:

California’s history of anti-Blackness hides beneath its progressive reputation - High Country News

A new history of the state traces early civil rights battles spearheaded by Black activists.

www.hcn.org

or segregated beaches

Americaâs segregated shores: beaches' long history as a racial battleground

For decades officials imposed regulations to restrict African Americans’ use of public beaches – and the fight for equal access is far from over

www.theguardian.com

National Parks, while federal, still adhered to Jim Crowe in the states where those laws were.

How The National Park Service Grappled With Segregation During The 20th Century

Separate campgrounds, dining rooms, picnic grounds, and restrooms. Maps and signs that directed blacks to destinations away from whites. This was the landscape of segregation in some national parks during that divisive chapter of the country’s history. While the signs have been taken down and...

www.nationalparkstraveler.org

In addition, Jim Crowe didn’t just effect those who lived in a state but anyone who had to travel through it. I don’t you need to sort out who lived where and for how long.

So it seems that now that you got some of us onboard for reparations for those who lived in Jim Crowe states, you’re pushing it to include others because restrictions existed on those in other states. As I said in nother thread, there were covenants against Jews, as well, and none of us - in my parents‘ generation - are pushing for reparations as a result of that.

And this shows the problem with the entire concept with reparations. Once a more limited Jim Crowe program is instituted, blacks and their liberal white enablers will be looking for examples of historical racism elsewhere and pushing to expand it until all blacks are getting free money.

I still say blacks would be better served if they devoted full resources to instilling better values in the black underclass as far as babies and schooling, and focused on the opportunities that exist in this great country and the many ways they can rise above poverty other than just getting money because their ancestors were victimized.

 

[Lisa558]

OK…..here is n example of restrictive covenants against both blacks AND Jews. So if you are claiming that discrimination impacted blacks beyond Jim Crowe and deserve reparations, then why not Jews? (Not that we want any or think we deserve it, as we are just glad we are living in this country and earned our way to a nice life, I‘m just showing you the problem when you focus on ONE single minority to give money to.)

Racial Restrictive Covenants: Enforcing Neighborhood Segregation in Seattle - Seattle Civil Rights and Labor History Project

Richard Ornstein, a Jewish refugee from Austria, contracted to purchase a home for his family in the Sand Point Country Club area of Seattle in late 1952. Unknown to both Ornstein and the seller, the property’s deed contained a neighborhood-wide restrictive covenant barring the sale or rental of …

depts.washington.edu