Printable View
perhaps i am about to post a naive question. perhaps i should have read tard's post instead of holding out until after i post.
perhaps i should do a lot of things...
but who says we keep the native americans on reservations?
i suppose i am obvlivious to reality (being somewhere north of the stratus...) but doesn't oppression work both ways?
------------------
~~share some greased tea with me~~
General Philosophy
Discuss This...
The Acropolis
Although I think something should be done, I don't think it's a check, or even some kind of apology.
I think full acknowledgement of the contributions and inventions blacks have contributed to the U.S. should be a start.
It's too bad that the leading producer in the U.S. of black programming...B.E.T., doesn't seem to have the fire in their belly to make this happen.
------------------
Alex
This was one of the earliest topics on DISCUSS THIS... which I never replied to because (whilst I read it and thought about it) I could really come up with a solution-by that, I mean a workable solution.
It's all very well to say "of course they deserve some form of reparation after ..." but the reality is, the people who are paying the money (all americans) are not responsible for the actions committed before their time to people who are most likely not even alive anymore.
In Australia, there's that whole 'Sorry' issue between the Aborigines and the white settlers. A) the people saying sorry have done nothing 'wrong' whilst the the aboringines are only decendents of people who were oppressed. Although I did sign the sorry petition, the more I think about it, the more I see it as rather useless because a) I have never been responsible (intentionally or directly) for the oppression of anyone.
b) What good does it do? It gives the Aboriginal people no monetary benefit. It supposedly gives recognition and that's all good and noble but it doesn't do anything FOR the aborigines because the will not be better for it.
Now I know that this a little off the original topic, but the situation is fairly similar. If the US government decided to be good and give reparations to the blacks, what's to stop the native Indians, Hispanics, Asians from applying for reparations. The government cannot refuse the other races because that would be seen as favouritism regardless of their original good intentions.
Then there's the problem of how to dispense money or whatever. There's inequality everywhere so whose to say who gets what share? It will seem like beaurocracy again if a white government is condescendingly appointing and assessing how large a portion one particular family is going to receive of the reparations pie.
The problems facing the world cannot just be solved with money. In many instances, more money makes it worse because nothing is being done structurally to eradicate the problem. If/when it doesn't help the plight of the african americans, they will be saying it was a cheque to clear the guilty conscience of the white supremists.
So consequently, nothing will be done because life is not fair and the politics of it all will prevent it from ever happening unless by some polling accident an extreme leftist is voted into parliament/congress whatever you guys have and decide to give reparations to the africans and return the land to the indians. But the odds of that happening...
SO this is why i never replied to this post alex, it's a circular argument which can never be solved.
------------------
From Soulfilms: "It's all very well to say "of course they deserve some form of reparation after ..." but the reality is, the people who are paying the money (all americans) are not responsible for the actions committed before their time to people who are most likely not even alive anymore... [in Australia] the people saying sorry have done nothing 'wrong' whilst the aboringines are only decendents of people who were oppressed."
This was all I was trying to point out in my previous posts.
why?
and secondly, speaking of unanswered questions...
howzabout answering mine?
doesn't oppression work two ways?
------------------
~~share some greased tea with me~~
General Philosophy
Discuss This...
The Acropolis
what do you mean why?
and, who started the oppression?
------------------
Alex
In some ways the issue of generational tricledown is addressed in the idea that blacks in the U.S. are still better off than those currently living in most African nations. That may not sit well with many as a reason to avoid compensation but there is no denying the fact that people from all over the world want to come to the U.S. above all other countries because of the opportunities.
I think another similar topic that we'll be hearing more of is the possibility that large corporations that have roots in the old south that benefited from slave labor may be asked to pay the families of former slaves.
I will now say something that will shock a few.
Tha U.S.A. is the least racist country on the planet.
There I said it, and I can't take it back.
------------------
PRM
I gave numerous reasons for both sides of the coin. What I have noticed is those that are for no reparations never really address the numerous points I made about the "carryover" effect from one generation to the next.
I feel it is weak to just say well, the real victims are dead so what can we really do.
The first thing to really do is analyze what ripple effects have "carried over" from one generation to the next, and at least address those issues.
------------------
Alex
Is the United States the least Racist country on the planet?
...that would make a good topic post 8th man, go for it!
Shatzy, what two way oppression are you speakin of?
------------------
Alex
those who oppress, and those who are oppressed
------------------
~~share some greased tea with me~~
General Philosophy
Discuss This...
The Acropolis