I was previously taking part in a conversation about cultural and racial nickname dos and don'ts when it occured to me I haven't seen a discussion on the possibility of the U.S. government paying reporations to African Americans for their enslavement some 135 odd years ago. I personally have no real opinion other the than the dreadful hornets nest that could be dredged up given that reparations become reality.
Posted by My Publically Displayed Name (Member # 256) on :
This is a very sensitive matter.
The current governments have no part in the horrible practices carried out by many nations so many centuries ago. It is perhaps possible to blame the world's present-day problems on past generations, but you can't hold the current ones accountable for crimes committed by their ancestors.
Like you say, "come one, come all". There's no telling how much emotional damage will be caused if the (presumed buried) past is dragged up again. It's like a Pandora's Box... best left unopened.
Some countries have now issued formal apologies and expressed their deepest regrets regarding their history. Isn't that enough? Doesn't financial compensation only serve the wrong purpose? And just how far back should these reparations go? All the way to the Roman Empire, perhaps? A line has to be drawn somewhere, and that's bound to cause great tensions.
Besides, I don't think any amount of money will ever be enough to make up for the dark past.
(On a side note: the states that 'supplied' slaves to the West often profited from the 'merchandise' as well. Don't believe for a second that they have no blood on their hands.)
[ September 10, 2001: Message edited by: My Publically Displayed Name ]
Posted by BlueElectron (Member # 281) on :
I agree with what u said, but how about those countries that does not acknowledge their pass mistake. *cough* Japan *cough*
And it's only like 50 years ago, some of the victims are still pretty much alive. Man, sometime right after watching those damn special on History Television about astrocity carried out by the Japanese, I fell like going out, pick on the first Japanese I see, and kick his ass for my ancestor just for the hell of it.
Posted by USS Vanguard (Member # 130) on :
Reparations is unfortunately a very difficult issue to deal with. Mostly in the fact on how far back are we willing to go? For example, I doubt very much Chinese people are demanding reparations from the Mongolians or North Africans from Rome. Obviously some nations should say "sorry" (like Blue Election said, Japan, or the United States to any number of minorities) but should they be forced to pay these people? In some cases it seems obvious. One nation has recently invaded another, only to be kicked out by an international force, obviously, the invading nation isn't going to say, "well gee, sorry we invaded, but heck, we got the land now, its not really worth it to return it right now". My Publicly Displayed Name is absolutely right that a line must be drawn. However, WHERE is it to be drawn. How are we as a people to determine at what point is the deadline so to speak for repearations to be paid? Let's take the idea of reparations for slavery in the United States and Africa. If we as a nation were to repay each and every slave descendent (which would be a monumental if not expensive task) where would we go from there. Should the native americans receive reparations as well? How about Mexicans for Texas? Hawaiians for Hawaii? the Philippines? All the land we've taken is technically stolen property, are we really expected to return it 200 years on?
[ September 10, 2001: Message edited by: USS Vanguard ]
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Well, if you believe in Kharma, the Japanese certainly paid a lot of it back.
In fact, in the 20th century, most European countries also had a lot of shit happen to them. The US has managed to get of pretty much scot-free though.
This is just an observation, BTW.
Posted by MeGotBeer (Member # 411) on :
Speaking of reparations, it's not exactly something that hasn't happened before. The Democratic Congress pushed through -- and President Reagan, I believe (it might've been Bush) signed -- a bill of reparations for the Japanese-Americans interned during World War II.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Yes, but that's reparations to people who are still alive. Reparations for things like slavery would involve the giving of money to relatives of people who are long dead, who were wronged by people who are also long dead, and would also require that the money be paid by people totally uninvolved. The two concepts have little in common.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Strangely enough, Omega is, well, right.
Posted by MeGotBeer (Member # 411) on :
Its bound to happen every now and then.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I really don't want to set myself up as being for or against anything here, but I do think we should zero in on this claim:
quote: The current governments have no part in the horrible practices carried out by many nations so many centuries ago.
The traditional and nearly universal view of government is that it is not something that gets reinvented with every generation. That's why, in the U.S., we are all still bound by laws created 200 years ago. Are governments only responsible for those acts they undertake while the current administration is in place?
Here's a related question: Pope John Paul II has never ordered the widespread persecution and murder of non-Catholics in Spain and elsewhere. But the Church itself apparently felt responsible enough for such acts to apologize for them.
So, to sum up: Where are the boundaries between personal and civic responsibility? Are institutions more than the sum of their members at any one time?
Posted by MeGotBeer (Member # 411) on :
At the very least, I don't see why an apology for slavery from the Government is getting such harsh criticism.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
The problem is, while "just an apology" would be a very, very good thing, in our litigous-mad society that ain't gonna happen. Thanks the lawyers of our green earth, saying "I'm sorry" means "So if you want to sue me for damages, go right ahead, cause you'll win."
Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
That was well said Mr. Simon.
I can't say that I really support individual reparations for American slavery per se.
I would however like to see the national and state governments take responisbility for that peculiar institution. I would also like to see them act in a measurable way and set up a nationwide scholarship fund for the descendents of slaves.
Posted by G.K Nimrod (Member # 205) on :
How about the Falklands? Have things been settled there? How did they tidy up after the mess? And how's the Milosevic trial coming along? Have they managed to get him to look at the commitee, without crossing his arms and pouting?
I'd like to see the different states of Africa apologize for their occasional genocides, but that carries a serious "Please sign on my ass after you've kissed it" warning.
Posted by Wes1701E (Member # 212) on :
what does the human race love to continue to bring up horrible things that have come and gone in the past? why? what a waste of time. learn from it yes, but leave it in the past.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Well, you know, lessons of history, doomed to repeat, etc., etc.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Yes, but learning about history doesn't necessarily mean wallowing in it.
Posted by bear (Member # 124) on :
