Are Reparations for Slavery in the US a Valid Responsibility?

[80hours]

Discuss! This is a very controversial topic of course. The topic is rich in moral, emotional, and financial issues. 
All opinions are welcome (free speech). 

However, note that "I don't want my taxes going to reparations" is not an argument against, in my opinion, since then the question wouldn't mean much - no one wants their money to forcibly go to someone else (if you did want to give money to a group of people, freedom to donate is much better, I think we all would agree)! 
The question is one of responsibility and morality (whatever type of morality you have), as well as financial tenability for the country/regions.

Also, I don't care if you're a foreigner - hopefully you know the basics of America history though. 

[Brennarr]

I don't really like the idea of racial reparations in any capacity. Slavery was an abhorrent institution and there is no question institutionalized racism still exists, but I disagree with the idea that people today are responsible. Instead of worrying about apologizing for something that hasn't directly affected anyone alive today, let's just focus on ending institutional racism and creating equal economic opportunity for all people who suffer from poverty. 

[Guest]

No one alive today was kept as a slave by a white person in the way you are meaning. 

 

Also, in Africa, who sold the slaves to the white people? It was predominantly black slave owners, so should they (the Africans) also pay reparation? On top of that, if every race or culture who has been massacred, enslaved, and mistreated by another demanded reparation (especially when those people are only ancestors of the people who were originally enslaved) then literally every person on the planet would be having to pay reparation to someone else. Maori people would have to pay me reparations because they cannibalized some white people when white people first started invading their land, and white people would have to reparations for invading their land and massacring them in the first place, and on top of that I have Maori ancestry so I should get reparations from both Maori and white people, while also paying them to both. On top of that, Europeans especially (I think percentage-wise historically they're the most enslaved race?) have been enslaved for millennia by other Europeans and by other races and cultures, so should they also demand reparation?

 

Of course, if you personally are taken as a slave and are ordered to work without pay and terribly mistreated etc, hell yes you should work your arse off to get that person imprisoned and demand reparation for what they took from you. But know that 1) If someone could demand reparation for an ancestor being mistreated or kept as a slave, everyone could get reparation from someone, and 2) there were a LOT (the majority) of white people also living in poverty, in hellish conditions in America, who did not take black people as slaves, and who didn't have lives that were much better than what the black people were experiencing. So if a black person was to demand reparation from a white person, they'd also have to find out exactly which white person's great great grandfather took their great grandmother as a slave to demand payment, and what if that white person from today has their own mixed race ancestry now too? Then the black person is not only demanding reparation from that white ancestor but also from the black people who were enslaved in the first place. 

 

3) (and most importantly) if black people can develop a magic machine that will bring the actual white slave owners from a hundred years ago back to life, then hell yes, go after them for reparation.

[TheSmokingSkellie]

I disagree with reparations being paid for something that happened ages ago. Sure if they were asking for it when it was abolished or shortly after (like a decade or so) but now? Nah, focus on the other problems that are around us and not on what happened ages ago. 

[mori child]

I don't know much about the success rate for previous cases of monetary reparations in various countries. I'm not against the idea of monetary reparations, but I also think that it could further fuel resentment of some whites against blacks. There are plenty of people who already don't agree with affirmative action-- can you imagine their reaction if the government started paying repairs?

 

Even though we should care less about racists' feelings than we should care about the actual beneficiaries of this hypothetical reparation, I think it's important to take the big picture into account. People don't like feeling guilty. People don't like it when another group seems to get special treatment. The ideal thing would be for everyone to get along, right? For racism to be less of an issue. Rather than reparations, I'd personally like to see more money going into the fight against current systematic racism. We could put that money to use in the educational system, in the police system maybe... Use it for building positive interactions.

 

The Guardian put out this article that I like a lot-- it talks mainly about hidden bigotry that gets revealed in Google searches. It also says that providing examples of positive Muslim role models is a lot more effective than telling people that Islamophobia is bad. I think the same thing must be true of racism. I don't think we should combat racism by fighting racists, but rather by reconciling and educating people, bringing people together.

[Skycaptain]

 Couple of observations here. Firstly, whilst the USA made money from industries associated with the slave trade, Britain made far more, not least because before American independence, the USA was a British colony. Secondly, both Britain and the USA have massive sovereign debts, if reparations were made, they would, most likely come from cuts in welfare related services, which would affect the least affluent, often racial minorities 

[A mere monkey]

No black living in America right now is a slave and no white person living in America right now has owned slaves. Don't see why any reparations should be payed taking into account it has been a couple centuries now. It just seems an excuse to guilt trip people who didn't commit a crime just to get "tolerance points" or whatever. 

I think solving other racial problems is more important than paying reparations for something that happened centuries ago. 

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, mori child said:

Even though we should care less about racists' feelings than we should care about the actual beneficiaries of this hypothetical reparation

You don't have to be racist to think it's a silly idea. Just to clarify.

 

Again, if everyone whose ancestors were once enslaved could demand reparation, pretty much everyone alive today could demand reparation from someone. And it was only a small percentage of white people who owned black slaves (who were usually sold to them by African slave traders, just to clarify), the rest of the whites in America lived in varying states of poverty without slaves. So even if someone did agree that blacks should be paid reparation, you'd have to seek out the specific ancestors of the (now long dead) wealthy slave owners. If the govt were to pay the reparations, where would the money come from? Welfare cuts?

[LeChat]

22 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

...if everyone whose ancestors were once enslaved could demand reparation, pretty much everyone alive today could demand reparation from someone...

Yes. My relatives weren't given any reparation from Germany for being kicked out of their own country, Poland; sent to concentration camps; killed or (the ones that survived) left destitute, where they sometimes couldn't afford to buy food or attend college. There've always been Polish "jokes," where, even today, in the U.K., residents don't like them because they're usually poor or uneducated.

 

Even though they went through the same thing as the Jewish people, they're not, and haven't, been given any Affirmative Action benefits in the U.S., where people keep wrongly assuming and claiming that only Jewish people were sent to concentration camps and killed by the Nazi regime during World War II. For decades, my relatives have felt upset by this because they feel that their history is being ignored.

[ThaHoward]

On 23.10.2017 at 10:23 PM, InquisitivePhilosopher said:

Yes. My relatives weren't given any reparation from Germany for being kicked out of their own country, Poland; sent to concentration camps; killed or (the ones that survived) left destitute, where they sometimes couldn't afford to buy food or attend college. There've always been Polish "jokes," where, even today, in the U.K., residents don't like them because they're usually poor or uneducated.

 

Even though they went through the same thing as the Jewish people, they're not, and haven't, been given any Affirmative Action benefits in the U.S., where people keep wrongly assuming and claiming that only Jewish people were sent to concentration camps and killed by the Nazi regime during World War II. For decades, my relatives have felt upset by this because they feel that their history is being ignored.

But Germany did pay reperations to Europe. In the form of monetary compensation, German POWs being used as forced labour, confiscation of countless of properties (all of East Germany, now Poland and Russia), confiscation of great amounts of industry (to such levels as literally ripping railway tracks up and sending them to other parts) and annexation of former German lands. It isn't their fault the USSR screwed over post war eastern Europe.

[Sally]

1 hour ago, InquisitivePhilosopher said:

 

Even though they went through the same thing as the Jewish people, they're not, and haven't, been given any Affirmative Action benefits in the U.S., where people keep wrongly assuming and claiming that only Jewish people were sent to concentration camps and killed by the Nazi regime during World War II. For decades, my relatives have felt upset by this because they feel that their history is being ignored.

I've never heard anyone denying that others besides Jews were put into concentration camps.  That's pretty well known in America.   Jews in America have not been given any "Affirmative Action" benefits.  

[Sally]

As far as reparations, if they were instituted, America would have to somehow make reparation to every Native American tribe who lost their lands, which constituted pretty much the whole country, and their children, who were taken from their homes and incarcerated in American schools.  

[nanogretchen4]

Yes, reparations should be paid both to African Americans and to Native Americans. At the very least slaves should have been paid whatever the going rate would have been for a free white person doing the same type of labor for the same number of hours, plus damages for assault, rape, separation from their families, and other serious harm. Had this money which they were rightfully entitled to been paid to them, it would have been inherited by their descendants, and very likely invested profitably. Since it hasn't been paid, it is still owed to their descendants, adjusted for inflation and with interest. The ancestors of the white majority profited by withholding this money, and their descendants inherited this ill-gotten wealth.

 

Because of the scale of the injustice and the amount of time that has passed, and because the fact that slavery was ever legal here is a national atrocity, the only thing that makes sense is national reparations to all African Americans. The money will come from income taxes, which African Americans also pay of course. However, with graduated income taxes the rich pay more, or at least they would if we would eliminate the ridiculous loopholes the rich use. If we enforced ethical income tax laws, citizens too poor to be taxed would lose nothing as a result of the reparations. So, poor whites would not be harmed, and working class whites would probably pay very little. A handful of very successful African Americans would end up paying in more than they got back, but it would amount to an overall redistribution of wealth from rich and middle class white people to African Americans. 

 

I really don't understand the notion that the money would have to come from cuts in social programs. It's totally fine to actually raise taxes on people who can afford to pay them, especially if they are paying back money their ancestors stole, which they have had the use of for all these generations. If the amount paid to African Americans is as large as it ought to be, many people who qualify for welfare now will be well above the poverty line. So in that sense the total number of welfare recipients will decrease, and a larger percentage of those who still qualify for welfare will be white.

 

The logic for reparations to Native Americans is comparable in some ways, but much more complicated by issues of land ownership, many different tribal identities, dual citizenship, etc. To start with it's less clear in that case whether the US would pay the money directly to individuals, or to tribal governments that would then decide how to distribute it.

[SorryNotSorry]

Africans, Native Americans... we might as well add the Irish to the list. For decades before the famne of the 1840s, many Irish who came to the US did so as indentured servants, and surprise surprise, a few free blacks in the US actually owned Irish indentured servants!

 

BTW where's my handout check for my great-great-great-great-grandfather's journey on the Trail of Tears?

 

Seriously though, the whole idea of modern-day compensation for wrongs committed before the 20th century should be laid to rest, because it seems like an idea that's intended to reopen old wounds.

[nanogretchen4]

Indentured servants signed contracts to work a certain number of years in exchange for transportation plus room, board, and clothing during their indenture. I'm not saying it was a great deal, but they received the compensation they agreed in advance to work for. That is not at all comparable to African American slavery. Slaves never agreed to be slaves and were never paid anything for their labor. Their term of labor never ended, and their condition of slavery was inherited by their descendants for multiple generations, after which their freed but still uncompensated descendants were subjected to legal discrimation for generations and de facto discrimination to this day.

 

As for your claim to a share of reparations to Native Americans, if the reparations end up getting paid to a tribal government you would then have to convince that government that you qualify as a member.

[Gloomy]

Most if not all of us have both ancestors who were mistreated, and ancestors who were the ones responsible for the mistreatment. Even if that weren't the case, I do not believe people are entitled to money for something their ancestors who have been dead for hundreds of years went through.

[Yatogami]

Reparations are ridiculous. Not to mention only 1% of the population owned slaves. Many blacks didn't come over as slaves in the later years. Then there is zero way to verify any of it. 

 

 

[Lonemathsytoothbrushthief]

This question should have been posted in Hot Box imo...because you've all ended up forming exactly the same opinion while complaining about it, anyway reparations do not have to be strictly monetary. I'm actually pretty sure that's not what the majority of the world would even want from the West, as opposed to an offer to never cause a military coup in their countries again, and start offering land back to countries which are owed it. The socioeconomic system which we have right now may have begun to form in other parts of the world as well as Europe, but in the end was enforced to the gain of the West rather than other countries, which means our very system enforces western superiority and any monetary reparations to people couldn't undo that. Especially since the people offering those reparations  would only really give them to people who they basically control anyway.

 

Real reparations would involve possible war and a dismantling of western armies, the same as happened to Germany after WW2 imo, resulting in a substantial decrease in the ability of countries like mine to maintain their consumerist lifestyle and economy. And I think they'd be fair in doing so, but only so long as reparations are followed with a dismantling of the capitalist state as the foundation of a global economy, leading to freedom from borders, police, etc. Though it would be tough, and similarly to what happened after feudalism there'd still be plenty of areas where people collapsed back into capitalism, they just wouldn't have the global influence anymore because people would know that's what's needed to deal with climate change and so on.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[ChillaKilla]

The idea of reparations over-simplifies the scope of the issue. We have to work on dismantling the societal institutions that are a result of slavery and racism- the ones that keep a disproportionate number of POC at or below the poverty line and overrepresented in crime rates- not just fling money at a problem in the hopes it dissipates.

[praetorius]

There should be reparations for the current and ongoing structural racism problems oppressing people of color, the historical roots of which can be traced back to slavery in this country, but have been maintained by many later processes right up to the present day.

 

A good place to start would be fulfilling the demands of the civil rights movement, many of which have been ignored. Take, for example, the goals of one of the big civil-rights era protest marches, with demands outlining actions considered necessary to start restoring justice:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_on_Washington_for_Jobs_and_Freedom

 

these include a higher minimum wage (when injusted for inflation from $2 1963 dollars), federal infrastructure jobs programs, better protection for union labor rights, "Enforcement of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution by reducing congressional representation from States that disenfranchise citizens" --- quite a few things very relevant for today (and beneficial for the working class of all races).

[Sally]

On 10/25/2017 at 8:52 AM, nanogretchen4 said:

I really don't understand the notion that the money would have to come from cuts in social programs.

Perhaps you could explain that to the Republicans.  They think that the money for EVERYTHING should come from cuts in social programs.

 

But as far as reparations, that would never end, since Europeans' maltreatment of those they found living in what's now North and Meso-America started in the 1500s with Cortez, et al.  There is simply no way to formulate a way to do that.  Reparations would also need to be paid to every group of humans on earth that were enslaved, tortured, killed by disease or murder, or shoved out of where they were found living.  That would entail a ridiculously complex daisy chain of people paying and receiving, most of them both at the same time.  

 

Anyone who thinks reparations should be paid should explain, in detail, how to determine who would get reparations, how that process would be formulated, and just who would pay them.  

[XYZ96]

To put it bluntly, I think it's a ridiculous idea. 

Many people in the states don't have ancestors that had slaves, many don't even have ancestors who lived in the states during the time there was slavery that wasn't illegal. No one alive in America at the moment was (legally) a slave or a slave owner

What about those blacks, who don't have ancestors that were slaves? and how are you going to prove they have or don't have ancestors that were slaves? what about people who are white, but happen to have ancestors that were slaves (as in african american slaves)? what about blacks who have ancestors that were slave owners?

Honestly I don't think we should be living in the past, sure we shouldn't completely ignore the past, but we need to live in the present and build for the future and not try and build the past.. it's silly.. 

And like people have already pointed out, (probably) everyone on earth has ancestry that has been oppressed, had been wronged or kicked out their home.

(I don't think we shouldn't help african americans, they have a higher chance of living in poverty and stuff, which is very unfortunate, the poor in general need to be given a way to come out of poverty, and one way, I think, to do that would to make the funding for schools more even, so that schools in inner city and poorer areas aren't significantly different then schools in well of areas.. )

[nanogretchen4]

In the case of slavery, a large part of the money that should be paid is a straightforward financial debt. Multiple lifetimes' worth of wages were withheld from the ancestors of African Americans, and that money should have been inherited by their descendents. White Americans profited by withholding those wages, and their descendants seem to think that it makes perfect sense to inherit their ancestors' assets without also inheriting their debts. Ridiculous! In practice, the US government is clearly not going to pay up anytime soon. We would need to vote a very different administration into office before anything resembling justice might get done. The fact remains that much of the wealth currently enjoyed by the white population is straight up stolen. Are they going to return their stolen loot? Probably not. But let's at least stop acting like that is a position based on reason or righteousness. It's self interest, period. Paying back our debts may be inconvenient and less fun than spending that money on ourselves, but when we ignore debts they don't just disappear, they accrue interest. Admitting that we owe a bunch of money is the first step. Maybe if we can do that much we can at least get over the disgusting, appalling self righteousness about affirmative action and social services. White people are neither victims nor great humanitarians for sharing a tiny fraction of their wealth. They are simply making a small payment toward a large debt.

 

I don't think telling the truth about this obligates me to singlehandedly propose a detailed solution to all possible logistical problems. Yes, implementing reparations will be complicated and a lot of work. That's not a valid excuse for not doing it. Public schools, transportation, and the military are all expensive, complicated, and a lot of work, yet we make these things happen anyway. First people have to have the will to do justice. Then the logistics can be worked out with time, effort, and cooperation. I have said I favor a payment from the federal government so that the debt is spread over a large number of people through a graduated income tax so the money comes primarily from those most able to pay. This way we can pay back the debt without bankrupting anyone. But I'd be happy to consider and discuss other logistical approaches once we admit that we owe a bunch of money and we need to find a way to pay it back.

[XYZ96]

1 hour ago, nanogretchen4 said:

Multiple lifetimes' worth of wages were withheld from the ancestors of African Americans, and that money should have been inherited by their descendents

Many things influence how much money someone has when they die and inherit further to their descendants, random things like winning the lottery or their house being destroyed in a storm, and also peoples personalities, some people are great with managing money, some suck at it.. How are you going to determine how much money those individuals would have today if their ancestors had been given the money? It's impossible, or at least darn near impossible. You are without a doubt going to underpay and overpay people.. and what about blacks who don't decent from slaves and what about whites who descend from slaves? (someone can have black ancestry and look super white)

 

1 hour ago, nanogretchen4 said:

In practice, the US government is clearly not going to pay up anytime soon. We would need to vote a very different administration into office before anything resembling justice might get done

and they shouldn't pay up, because it'd be ridiculous to do so, most people don't even know anything about their ancestors from over 100 years ago, why would want justice for them? why would they need justice for them? Why does someone need justice for someone else, especially someone they never met and are barely related to?  

 

1 hour ago, nanogretchen4 said:

The fact remains that much of the wealth currently enjoyed by the white population is straight up stolen

why? explain how, and why does this only apply to whites? 

If you are talking about a few people who got their money through tax evasion and stuff, then sure, yeah, that's stolen wealth.. 

and if your answer is because slaves were forced to build many things in the US, and contributed to the US become rich, then that wealth is also being enjoyed by blacks.. besides, slaves aren't the only reason the US became rich, it's not necessarily even the biggest reason (though I don't know how much an effect it played, or if we could even know how big the effect was), another reason the US became rich was because the world wars devastated Europe, which meant a major competitors to the US were eliminated.. 

what about the many many many people not descended from slave owners? is there wealth stolen as well? 

 

1 hour ago, nanogretchen4 said:

But let's at least stop acting like that is a position based on reason or righteousness. It's self interest, period

nope, it's not out of self interest for a lot of people, I currently don't pay US taxes, and I'm not the only person on in this thread not paying US Taxes.. 

My position comes because I think it's ridiculous to hold someone accountable for what their ancestors did and they had no part in, are you going to hold the child or grandchild of a murderer accountable for their parent or grandparents murders?.. 

 

1 hour ago, nanogretchen4 said:

Public schools, transportation, and the military are all expensive, complicated, and a lot of work, yet we make these things happen anyway

yes, because they are necessary for a well off functional society.. reparations for people who have been dead for 100+ years is not. 

 

 

now, paying reparations, or rather making the slave owners of current day slaves pay back the people they enslaved, that is totally reasonable, I'll support that.  

[Sally]

Consider a situation where a current-day American family contains all these different ancestors:  African slaves, African slave sellers, white American slave owners, white European non-slave owners, East Indians, Chinese slaves, slave owners, and non-slave owners, Japanese slaves, slave owners and non-slave owners, Amerindian slaves, Amerindian non-slaves, ad infinitum.  

 

Of all the countries in the world, America is the one with the most mixed heritage.  Considering that, there is NO way that reparations could be determined fairly.  

[nanogretchen4]

I think the difficulties are being exaggerated. If my idea about a federal payout is followed, the money comes from all the taxpayers regardless of ancestry and the amount paid in is based on income. We already have an income tax in place, so that's simple. So then the hypothetical American of mixed ancestry would simply need to demonstrate some reasonable percentage of African ancestry to be eligible for payment. The rest of the ancestral details you mention would not be relevant to the case. Possibly at least one African American ancestor would have to have been in the country prior to desegregation and the end of the Jim Crow laws. There are already Americans who are eligible for certain rights and benefits due to having at least one Cherokee grandparent, for example. And yes, the recipients also pay taxes like everyone else, and that's okay. This is not actually as complicated as all that, nor is it such a slippery slope. African American slavery was a national atrocity on a huge scale and the real question is whether we are willing to take national responsibility for it or not.

[Sally]

1 hour ago, nanogretchen4 said:

 So then the hypothetical American of mixed ancestry would simply need to demonstrate some reasonable percentage of African ancestry to be eligible for payment. 

I have a friend who is mixed white and African.  Her grandfather came from Africa 80 years ago and he was not a slave.  So my friend would get a payment?  

[nanogretchen4]

If it were up to me, probably, since that is long enough ago to have been subjected to significant legal discrimination on the basis of race. It is much easier to show records of ancestry prior to the end of the Jim Crow laws than to go back to before the Civil War. The majority of African Americans who lived here eighty years ago probably did have ancestors who were slaves. If a few people whose ancestors "only" experienced segregation, discrimination in housing, employment, transportation, and use of public facilities get the payment, that's probably cheaper than trying to prove that on a case by case basis. It's like when 90% of the students in a school district qualify for free lunches, so it's cheaper to give them to everyone than to sort it out. Certainly it would be a closer approximation to justice than doing nothing.

[Evren]

50 minutes ago, Sally said:

I have a friend who is mixed white and African.  Her grandfather came from Africa 80 years ago and he was not a slave.  So my friend would get a payment?  

This more than anything is why this idea doesn't work. Im part german, italian, scottish and native american (that i know of). If reparations were paid to native americans because of the settlers, would I have to pay them and recive them or do I not get them because im such a small percentage of native american? Also I have no idea what other ancestory I might have so would that mean mandatory dna testing or are we just going to hope people aren't lying?