• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

The Confederate Flag

Status
Not open for further replies.

Enkhidu

Explorer
I feel like that is phrased as a challenge in some way, although tone is hard to detect on a forum. I am open to any valid claims of reparation, although it's not my decision. The UK has engaged in many reparations over the years, and rightfully so.

I gather from this that you are not?

I think the situations (US and descendents of slaves vs the UK and Ireland/India) are similar enough to draw parallels, and wanted to know if your stance changed based on whether or not you were the one giving the reparations.

Your right, by the way. I don't think that reparations are warranted in either case. And its for entirely emotional reasons - I object to the notion that I am personally responsible for things that happened hundreds of years ago (even as I recognize that there was a single branch of my family tree that did benefit from slavery in the late 1700's).

On the other hand I wouldn't for example be opposed to the UK taking a Indian trade negotiation in order to level the playing fields, for the same reason I am not opposed to affirmative action. Both are recognitions of an unfair status quo without an assignment of blame.

Frankly, if you used a different term for what would be functionally the same thing (a lump sum payment to black households) I would probably be OK with it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
and wanted to know if your stance changed based on whether or not you were the one giving the reparations.

No. That would make me intellectually dishonest. Why would you think such a thing of me?

I object to the notion that I am personally responsible for things that happened hundreds of years ago

Hmm. I thought I explained at length that that was not even slightly was reparations are. But OK. One attempt at explanation is all I'm up for.
 

Enkhidu

Explorer
No. That would make me intellectually dishonest. Why would you think such a thing of me?

Because its easy for people to do so due to differences in perspective. Just wanted to make sure that this one wasn't in your blind spot.

Hmm. I thought I explained at length that that was not even slightly was reparations are. But OK. One attempt at explanation is all I'm up for.

Oh you certainly gave your explanation for what reparations are, but the language you used didn't exactly erase the idea that descendents aren't responsible for the actions of their ancestors. Like I said, this one is based on emotion (which, I believe, is why the term was chosen in the first place - those who feel reparations are due likewise believe that those who have the gains continue to participate in the wrongdoing).
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
Let's put it a different way: should the descendants of Nazi Elites be allowed to keep the art, land and other assets stolen from Jews (and others) in the 1930s & 1940s when descendants of those Jews ask for them back? (Especially considering the full context of how those things were stolen.)

I'm thinking the answer is no. But it isn't because those descendants of Nazis are personally responsible, but because their ancestors were...and denying reparations of this kind just perpetuates the original crime. The passage of time doesn't make the crime diminish.

Blacks- and others- who talk of reparations (I'm not one, though I think it would be nice and moral) are doing so on the basis of something long enshrined in our legal system: the government can't make you whole, but an award of money can improve your situation, while simultaneously being a symbol of apology and recognition of a moral wrong done. It doesn't come close to being enough to balance the scales of justice, but it is a visible and tangible "Mea Culpa."
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Oh you certainly gave your explanation for what reparations are, but the language you used didn't exactly erase the idea that descendents aren't responsible for the actions of their ancestors.

On the contrary, I said that extremely specifically.
 

MechaPilot

Explorer
Your right, by the way. I don't think that reparations are warranted in either case. And its for entirely emotional reasons - I object to the notion that I am personally responsible for things that happened hundreds of years ago (even as I recognize that there was a single branch of my family tree that did benefit from slavery in the late 1700's).

Allow me to attempt to explain reparations differently.

Reparations are not a sanction placed on people for the things that happened generations ago. Reparations are paid or granted by a government to those they have wronged, or the descendants thereof in cases where the originally wronged parties are no longer around.

Now we all realize (or should) that a government that is going to pay reparations must raise those funds from its citizens. However, this cannot always be done evenly across the board. Consider reparations for slavery in the U.S. It would not make sense to tax the descendants of slaves as part of the fund-raising to pay reparations to the descendants of slaves. So, in that case you end up with only part of the citizenry bearing the burden of the funding of the reparations. This occurs not because those people should be punished, but because to do otherwise defeats the purpose of the reparations.

One of the things that I have proposed before as part of a U.S. reparations plan is interest free education loans for the descendants of slaves.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Imagine you're poor and I'm rich.

Then imagine that's because my dad stole all your dad's money. And now both have passed on.

Would you say there's no obligation for me to give you back that money? That it's now rightfully mine? Despite the fact that I personally did nothing?

I mean, society disagrees with you if that's the case, but it's interesting to hear that there are people who feel they are entitled to keep the ill-gotten gains simply because they personally didn't do the crime.
 


Henry

Autoexreginated
Let's put it a different way: should the descendants of Nazi Elites be allowed to keep the art, land and other assets stolen from Jews (and others) in the 1930s & 1940s when descendants of those Jews ask for them back? (Especially considering the full context of how those things were stolen.)

I'm thinking the answer is no. But it isn't because those descendants of Nazis are personally responsible, but because their ancestors were...and denying reparations of this kind just perpetuates the original crime. The passage of time doesn't make the crime diminish.

Blacks- and others- who talk of reparations (I'm not one, though I think it would be nice and moral) are doing so on the basis of something long enshrined in our legal system: the government can't make you whole, but an award of money can improve your situation, while simultaneously being a symbol of apology and recognition of a moral wrong done. It doesn't come close to being enough to balance the scales of justice, but it is a visible and tangible "Mea Culpa."

My biggest problem with the concept of reparations is that, like most government distribution programs, they're poorly implemented, and often can't be agreed upon. What is appropriate reparations by the government for african slavery? A one-time lump sum? A yearly government stipend to every family with an enslaved ancestor? To anyone whose parent is black? Grandparent? Great-grandparent? A government college fund to every black or black-descended person in the U.S.?

At what point has someone's family been disadvantaged? If they make under $20,000 per year? $50,000 dollars? under $100,000? The concept of reparations might be emotionally charged, but the specifics of the implementation is a minefield to a society as racially intermixed as the U.S., especially south of the Mason-Dixon.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be done, I'm saying that something that has noble intentions will turn to crap very quickly once the politics of the cash-grab begin. As far in debt as the U.S. Government is now, the situation will be even worse once a 720 billion dollar recurring reparations bill gets tacked on. (Lets say 20,000 a year per person who identified as black on the 2010 census)

i'm assuming 20,000 a year because that's a nice round figure that will help with college funds, mortgage expenses, etc. it won't solve the question of reparations if it's not recurring, and it needs to be for about... What? 5 years? Ten years? Lifetime? Unsure, really. How much is propelling your country on the backs of others worth? I've been reading plans calling for everything from free education and medical for 50 years to a 40 trillion dollar cash payment.

Now, let's say this is done after the 2020 census, in which case the number of people who self-identify on the census as black will increase, causing investigation of all added claims. So all told we're looking at about a trillion dollars once administrarion costs are considered.

I'm not trying to be insulting, I promise, I'm just trying to put hard numbers on something that every time I see talked about in the news it's only spoken in the most general of terms, because very few people actually want to discuss the nuts and bolts.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
Your lists is a good start as to why I don't discuss reparations.

If it were to happen, my personal position is that it should be:

1) a 1 time untaxed payout, that is

2) means tested, so that those most currently disadvantaged get the most help, and

3) NOT created as a substitute for affirmative action programs- those address the slightly different issue of ongoing institutional/structural issues that have not been dismantled.

And that payout should be significant, but still mostly symbolic in size. It does nobody any good if the reparations are ruinously large and wreck the economy and/or societal structure. A payment of $20,000 to each black person in the USA would cost @$780,000,000,000- not reasonable on its face. (Add in similar numbers to Native Americans and possibly those who were in Japanse American internment caps in WW2, and it is even less feasible.)
 
Last edited:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top