The Case for Reparations

[Simple Minded]

Amen. I want the job of chief apparatchik who decides the tax rate or payment amount for each person based on the race percentage of their ancestors, where their ancestors settled in America, when their ancestors settled in America, whether their ancestors were actually slave owners or slaves, and whether they lost any life or property in the Civil War!

Why do you seem reparations would be handled like this? At this point, it's not even clear that any payments would be necessary. Reparations could come in many different forms, including legislation that addresses systemic discrimination (in the justice system, for example) and unequal access to public resources. But first, Americans have to want to address the issue, and it isn't clear that they do.

If this catches fire, I just want to make a living off it. A career in fairness management, would seem like a good retirement.

The phenomena of those who feel guilty, proud, or entitled due to something that someone of their race, nation, or geographic location did decades before their birth is an amazing phenomena. The personal Hell of identifying oneself as a subunit of a race, nation, location, religion, political movement, etc....

That's very easy to say when you're not a member of the underclass.

so you say, which is an interesting claim for one who refuses to define my "whiteness...."

[Zack Morris]

Data? Thank you Jesus! Data is what I am asking you for. When I got job X working for company Y competing against applicants A, B, and C. What was the skin tone grey scale number of each of the applicants?

Even better than answering this question is looking at the employment situation for blacks, both at the aggregate level and among new college graduates. The data indicates that blacks are less likely to find employment. Why do you suppose that is?

What were the names of the other applicants? Who had the best resume? Who had the most experience? Who was willing to work for the lowest wage, or accommodate the most demanding schedule? Regarding renting apartments or buying houses who was willing to cough up the required deposit and pay the rent/mortgage? Who had the best references?

Names, dates, places, companies, zip codes, and skin tone grey scales are all I’m asking for Zack. Either supply the missing information or admit you don’t know jack about what is beyond your personal experience. Then we will go back to our previous standing of you accurately observe what happens around you, I accurately observe what happens around me, and anything else we spule is at best, second-hand, here say, BS.

You seem to be trying to make a point here...

I don’t deny that group identity privilege exists locally and in organizations (KKK, Black Student Unions, La Raza, NOW),

Okay. But for some reason you deny that these privileges can scale to a larger playing field.

I think Sanda Fluke (who expects poor black people to pay for her birth control) might be a great example. But I have not met her, but she may merely be in favor of female privilege instead, or perhaps she is just disgruntled. The black & brown migrant workers I used to work with in the fields thought America a less oppressive place than a white, female Gergetwon law student!

Incoherent and immaterial to the topic at hand. Not to mention you have misrepresented Fluke's argument and apparently don't understand what birth control is often prescribed for.

When the black dude says to the white dude “You don’t know what it is like to be black in America!” He is right. But it is equally true that the black dude does not know what it is like to be white in America. All both have is their “feelings.” Unless, of course, we have “data.”

What should black people know about being white in America? White is normative in American society. Data, of course, paints an unflattering portrait of race relations in the United States. No wonder you are dismissive of it and prefer to focus on "feelings".

Maybe we should also "feel" our way through the climate change debate, through federal budgets, and economic policies?

To ignore so many variables, in so many complex, unique, and extremely personal situations, which can be interpreted by the actual participants in an almost infinite number of ways, and to focus only on skin color……hmmm…… is that not the very definition of racism?

Ah, back to the point you were trying to make: everyone has their own, personal challenges and advantages, and it is a person's set of experiences that shapes his or her destiny. It's not race that determines life outcomes, it's the individual experience.

Well, that is true, but in a world without systemic racial discrimination, we would expect the mix of advantages and disadvantages faced by individuals to be randomly distributed. There would be no correlation between race and earning power, race and wealth, race and home ownership, race and educational achievement, race and incarceration rate, etc. These would be factors determined on an individual basis. That is not what we see. Instead, we see that particular groups of people are vastly over-burdened with problems. What's more, a particular cohort of people have been severely persecuted with the full blessing of the law up until very recently. A large segment of the population is more likely to under-perform in life because of excess burdens beyond what would otherwise be expected.

Got it?


FWIW, I'm not in favor of reparation payments, but I do think there is a case to be made that the US has prematurely abandoned its efforts to address racial inequality. It's not an open-shut case like you seem to think it is. And it's worth pointing out that the US prides itself on the generosity exhibited by the Marshall Plan. Surely it can be argued that Germany brought about its own destruction -- was it fair for the US taxpayer to help rebuild it? Why the knee-jerk reaction against helping black people?

[Zack Morris]

so you say, which is an interesting claim for one who refuses to define my "whiteness...."

If people are likely to identify you or very recent ancestors as African American, then congratulations, reparations would be owed to you. If not, then I don't care what you look like. According to many conservatives and those who are most likely to oppose reparations, black people are easily identifiable, as evidenced by vocal disappointment when the media fails to mention a suspected criminal's race.

[Mr. Perfect]

EDIT: Link to article.

An unexpectedly powerful piece

What is unexpected about it?

by Ta-Nehisi Coates on the subject of the United States' brutalization and institutionalized subjugation of blacks. Rather than becoming mired in the technicalities of reparations and what form they would take, Mr. Coates attempts to make a powerful moral case for it. Most Americans are of course unaware of the extent of the systematic persecution of blacks

Citation pls.

and the extent to which it aided white prosperity.

I really want to see this citation.

Conservatives would like to forget it and,

No, we're just tired of being blamed for Democrat transgressions.

in Coates' words, believe "that if you stab a black person 10 times, the bleeding stops and the healing begins the moment the assailant drops the knife."

That's nice. So Zack Morris, after you apologize for your lies and false charges, why don't you tell everyone why after the 2008 election blacks did worse than any other group and why with near record majorities and public support the Democrats didn't breathe a word about reparations, let alone pass anything.

[Zack Morris]

and the extent to which it aided white prosperity.

I really want to see this citation.

Thoroughly covered in the article.

Conservatives would like to forget it and,

No, we're just tired of being blamed for Democrat transgressions.

Nobody but you buys that pre-60's Dixiecrats are somehow synonymous with post-60's Democrats. Confederate flags today fly at the whim of Republican state congresses and Republican state governors.

in Coates' words, believe "that if you stab a black person 10 times, the bleeding stops and the healing begins the moment the assailant drops the knife."

That's nice. So Zack Morris, after you apologize for your lies and false charges, why don't you tell everyone why after the 2008 election blacks did worse than any other group and why with near record majorities and public support the Democrats didn't breathe a word about reparations, let alone pass anything.

They're still reeling from effects of the Bush-era financial crisis and the obstructionist Congress that squandered years on pointless deficit talk. I've been to Republican states. I've heard their candid opinions on blacks (without even having to solicit them). Conservative country has never been hospitable to blacks. The article lays out clearly how racism in mid-20th century Chicago differed from racism in Mississippi, Texas, etc.

[Mr. Perfect]

Thoroughly covered in the article.

Maybe you could post it.

Nobody but you buys that pre-60's Dixiecrats are somehow synonymous with post-60's Democrats

Sorry Zack Morris. You will have to restate what people buy. The Dixiecrats stayed with the party and enjoyed full party privileges until 1994 when they left to the shock of the Democrat Party. Back to the drawing board for you.



8Fg3XNTMzNo

. Confederate flags today fly at the whim of Republican state congresses and Republican state governors.

And...

They're still reeling from effects of the Bush-era financial crisis

Why blacks more than all others? Why do rich white liberals do so well, the 1% is richer than ever, while the black folks set new poverty lows with each quarter. Why is that, under obama.

As for the financial crisis.

IyqYY72PeRM

Do you see how easy this is for me Zack Morris?

and the obstructionist Congress that squandered years on pointless deficit talk.

What does this have to do with anything. obama has created more debt by every measure than anyone else in history, why all of it to rich white people and zero to black people? Why do you support that so zealously?

I've been to Republican states. I've heard their candid opinions on blacks (without even having to solicit them).

What was that bit about anecdote vs data, just earlier I think.

Conservative country has never been hospitable to blacks.

Same with white liberal country. Black folks have it as bad there as anywhere. Some black folks and Democrats say not much different than antebellum slavery.

The article lays out clearly how racism in mid-20th century Chicago differed from racism in Mississippi, Texas, etc.

Could be. Democrats from top to bottom though, so maybe an internal discussion for you guys.

You could work on your lying, false charges, and long history of racism.

And you could answer, afr 2008 when the GOP was assumed ended, you had near record popularity and control of government, you guys did not breathe one word about reparation. Why is that Zack Morris?

[Mr. Perfect]

Even better than answering this question is looking at the employment situation for blacks, both at the aggregate level and among new college graduates. The data indicates that blacks are less likely to find employment. Why do you suppose that is?

obama.

[Zack Morris]

Thoroughly covered in the article.

Maybe you could post it.

Maybe you could read it. I don't have time to teach you basic literacy.

Nobody but you buys that pre-60's Dixiecrats are somehow synonymous with post-60's Democrats

Sorry Zack Morris. You will have to restate what people buy. The Dixiecrats stayed with the party and enjoyed full party privileges until 1994 when they left to the shock of the Democrat Party. Back to the drawing board for you.

False. With the exception of a single Carter victory streak, the South immediately began shifted toward Republican Presidents, and Republican values: the following table shows a distinct shift toward Republican governors. Did Dixiecrat politicians abandon their party? No, and conservative southern voters continued to support anyone aligned with their viewpoints, hence more Republicans and "Democrats" like George Wallace and Zell Miller.

A similar shift happened in the northeast: once solid Republican territory, it became Democratic. But for some reason, you're as quiet as a mouse peeing on cotton about that. I don't hear you claiming northeastern liberalism as quintessentially Republican.

Republicans own the south and its values now.

8Fg3XNTMzNo

Clinton was always an unprincipled opportunist and nobody knows what he really believed. But one thing's for sure, whether he really cared about black people or just wanted their votes, he calculated correctly and has acted in favor of them. Today, voter suppression is part of the southern Republican agenda, not the Democratic one.

. Confederate flags today fly at the whim of Republican state congresses and Republican state governors.

And...

Only a historical revisionist -- and maybe someone who trivializes slavery and Jim Crow -- would argue that the Confederate flag represents anything else than a slaver society.

IyqYY72PeRM

Do you see how easy this is for me Zack Morris?

Why cherry pick exchanges from an 11th hour congressional hearing? What percentage of mortgages were backed by GSEs? Do you know the figure? Because I have it. I wonder why your Youtube video doesn't discuss it. This issue has been thoroughly picked apart by economists.

What does this have to do with anything. obama has created more debt by every measure than anyone else in history, why all of it to rich white people and zero to black people? Why do you support that so zealously?

The debt is not related to our economic difficulties, which by the way are abating.

Conservative country has never been hospitable to blacks.

Same with white liberal country. Black folks have it as bad there as anywhere. Some black folks and Democrats say not much different than antebellum slavery.

It's bad in liberal country but not nearly as bad as conservative country. The article makes that very clear. There's a reason why you can't point to a single hospitable place for blacks in conservative land.

Could be. Democrats from top to bottom though, so maybe an internal discussion for you guys.

Except for those northeast Republicans, right? Anyway, blacks endured great hardship to migrate to areas where opportunities were best for them and where some modicum of equal treatment existed. If conservative country offered them that, they'd have ended up there. But as it stands, you have no success stories to point to.

[Mr. Perfect]

Maybe you could read it. I don't have time to teach you basic literacy.

Or the ability.

You must be able to do before you can teach. Your reading comprehension issues are legend at this point. I'm not sure if I've ever seen you respond to what anyone actually says for more than a post or two, if that.

Sounds like there isn't anything in the article to support your claim.

False. With the exception of a single Carter victory streak, the South immediately began shifted toward Republican Presidents, and Republican values: the following table shows a distinct shift toward Republican governors. Did Dixiecrat politicians abandon their party? No, and conservative southern voters continued to support anyone aligned with their viewpoints, hence more Republicans and "Democrats" like George Wallace and Zell Miller.

Good for a laff Zack Mprris. The South was majority Democrat in every category, Senators, House of Representatives, Governors, state legislators until 1994, when Democrats woke up in shock and anger that the crackers left them. I was there Zack Morris and you have no idea what you are talking about.

A similar shift happened in the northeast: once solid Republican territory, it became Democratic. But for some reason, you're as quiet as a mouse peeing on cotton about that. I don't hear you claiming northeastern liberalism as quintessentially Republican.

And what does this have to do with anything. Do you think about any of this stuff before you hit submit.

Republicans own the south and its values now.

Yes. The GOP owns a far less racist south. Today the South doesn't seem any more or less racist than any other place in the country. And we're happy to have them. If they get real racist again we'll hand 'em back to you. They and the Reverend Wright/La Raza wing of the party should get along real well.

Clinton was always an unprincipled opportunist and nobody knows what he really believed. But one thing's for sure, whether he really cared about black people or just wanted their votes, he calculated correctly and has acted in favor of them. Today, voter suppression is part of the southern Republican agenda, not the Democratic one.

There is no voter suppression in the US.

Only a historical revisionist

Name one single historical item I've ever revised ever ever ever in my time in the Spengworld, or we can add this as yet another false charge or lie from Zack Morris. One singe instance. Now.

-- and maybe someone who trivializes slavery and Jim Crow -- would argue that the Confederate flag represents anything else than a slaver society.

Mm hmm.



Bo and Luke Duke fighting for slavery and Jim Crow one CBS episode at a time.

If Democrats get to trivialize slavery you have to let other people do it Zack Morris.

And who can forget the cross burning Bubba Watson rallying his country boys to the call of Jim Crow.



Careful, Bubba might have a noose in that trophy.

Why cherry pick exchanges from an 11th hour congressional hearing?

Because it shows who was really for subprime mortgages (Democrats) and who was against them (Republicans). Obviously.

What percentage of mortgages were backed by GSEs? Do you know the figure?

Yes I do.

Because I have it. I wonder why your Youtube video doesn't discuss it. This issue has been thoroughly picked apart by economists.

The same economists that predicted the below?

The debt is not related to our economic difficulties, which by the way are abating.

What does that have to do you with guys helping white people enormously and doing nothing whatsoever for black people.

Why did you do that?

It's bad in liberal country but not nearly as bad as conservative country. The article makes that very clear. There's a reason why you can't point to a single hospitable place for blacks in conservative land.

I can also not point to a single hospitable place for blacks in liberal land. What you have done to black folks is reprehensible.

Except for those northeast Republicans, right? Anyway, blacks endured great hardship to migrate to areas where opportunities were best for them and where some modicum of equal treatment existed. If conservative country offered them that, they'd have ended up there. But as it stands, you have no success stories to point to.

And of course now that black people have done worse under obama than any other group, neither can you.

[Apollonius]

The issue of reparations, at least in the broader context of New World slavery, has been discussed here:


viewtopic.php?f=22&t=2697




That's where you will find my two cents worth.



Here are some interesting details about specifically American slavery that most people are unacquainted with:


Black history they don't want you to know - DailyKenn, 2 May 2012
http://dailykenn.blogspot.ca/2012/05/2- ... first.html




It is actually unlikely that the first slave owner in colonial America was in fact a black person, as is reported here. Someone has provided some sources in the comments which document the actual state of our knowledge.



However, the piece is still interesting because of the many other little known snippets of history that it gets right. Even the first case, while technically not the first slaveholder, does shed some light on how the institution got started in America and does reveal how the history of slavery is far more nuanced than what you were told in school or heard on a History Channel program.

The part about all the large number of black slaveholders is very well documented, and it's good to remember that a black person in the U.S. is actually more likely to be descended from a slaveholder than a white person! Remember: not one white person in a hundred has a slaveholder in their ancestry.

The most basic piece of information is the part that most people still can't quite wrap their minds around, which is that virtually all slaves were sold to Europeans by other Africans. In the comments section there is mention of how the stereotypical cotton plantation was actually a short-lived phenomenon dating from sometime after the invention of the cotton gin. The point is well made that before then, slavery in the U.S. was concentrated in domestic endeavours without the long hours in the field and the sepraration of families that industrialization of agriculture entailed (something that had similar consequences for "free" white workers as well).



No one seems to have added that plantation slavery was by no means absent in Africa. Several West African states practiced it on a massive scale. The worst working conditions were then, as now, in the mines, a negligible part of the American slavery experience, but prominent in parts of Africa.



I especially liked the part about how Native Indian Americans were very well represented in the Confederate Army and how the last general to surrender to Union forces was a Cherokee chief!


The statistics on lynching, a loaded word if there ever was one, are something I've looked into before, and are also interesting. No details here, but the image in people's minds is that these poor fellows were innocent victims of "racism". But usually, of course, this was not really the case. The great majority had committed heinous crimes. And as the article says, in most states, most lynchings were of white guys

[Apollonius]

Okay. Let's get away from slavery and talk about discrimination.



Zack,

I'm a beneficiary of slim privilege. That is, unlike most Americans, and a growing number of Canadians, I am not fat. I am sure that it has helped my career. My early jobs were doing hard physical labour. Doing work like this you'll either lose weight or your job. Short people, fat people, gay people, people who stutter, people who limp, people who don't do well in school are just some examples of people who have been discriminated against, often even in law, even though these conditions are at least partially, often largely hereditary.





The 125th anniversary issue of National Geographic, which appeared last October, is dedicated to photography.



One of the most interesting parts was a short article portraying some Americans who are of mixed race heritage.



Each photo was captioned by three categories of classification.


First, there was a fairly anthropological description of their actual heritage, the kind of thing you'd get from DNA testing and other genealogical data.

Second, there was a category called "self-identification", that is, what these people call themselves, which they admit can change depending on who asks and why they want to know.

Which brings us to the third category, which is what these mixed race people call themselves on the official census form. Interestingly, of the 18 individual portraits of mixed race people, 7 marked "black" on the census form, 1 indicated "black/white", while 1 marked "white", so there is obviously some caché to being black these days.





Monster Gardener's excellent reply brings to mind a list I recently saw of organizations founded by white people to help black people. There are dozens and dozens of them, and I'm sure this list was not comprehensive. The author of this list challenged readers to find an organization established by black people to help white people. Of course some people, probably racists, think that no white people need help.



Here's a thought. If people want to get into lawsuits, how about demanding reparations from their parents?

[monster_gardener]

The issue of reparations, at least in the broader context of New World slavery, has been discussed here:


viewtopic.php?f=22&t=2697




That's where you will find my two cents worth.



Here are some interesting details about specifically American slavery that most people are unacquainted with:


Black history they don't want you to know - DailyKenn, 2 May 2012
http://dailykenn.blogspot.ca/2012/05/2- ... first.html




It is actually unlikely that the first slave owner in colonial America was in fact a black person, as is reported here. Someone has provided some sources in the comments which document the actual state of our knowledge.



However, the piece is still interesting because of the many other little known snippets of history that it gets right. Even the first case, while technically not the first slaveholder, does shed some light on how the institution got started in America and does reveal how the history of slavery is far more nuanced than what you were told in school or heard on a History Channel program.

The part about all the large number of black slaveholders is very well documented, and it's good to remember that a black person in the U.S. is actually more likely to be descended from a slaveholder than a white person! Remember: not one white person in a hundred has a slaveholder in their ancestry.

The most basic piece of information is the part that most people still can't quite wrap their minds around, which is that virtually all slaves were sold to Europeans by other Africans. In the comments section there is mention of how the stereotypical cotton plantation was actually a short-lived phenomenon dating from sometime after the invention of the cotton gin. The point is well made that before then, slavery in the U.S. was concentrated in domestic endeavours without the long hours in the field and the sepraration of families that industrialization of agriculture entailed (something that had similar consequences for "free" white workers as well).



No one seems to have added that plantation slavery was by no means absent in Africa. Several West African states practiced it on a massive scale. The worst working conditions were then, as now, in the mines, a negligible part of the American slavery experience, but prominent in parts of Africa.



I especially liked the part about how Native Indian Americans were very well represented in the Confederate Army and how the last general to surrender to Union forces was a Cherokee chief!


The statistics on lynching, a loaded word if there ever was one, are something I've looked into before, and are also interesting. No details here, but the image in people's minds is that these poor fellows were innocent victims of "racism". But usually, of course, this was not really the case. The great majority had committed heinous crimes. And as the article says, in most states, most lynchings were of white guys

Thank You VERY MUCH for your post, Apollonius.

And for the VERY Interesting post........

Knew some of this........

But not nearly all.......

This article could make for a VERY Interesting Black History Month......

[monster_gardener]

Okay. Let's get away from slavery and talk about discrimination.



Zack,

I'm a beneficiary of slim privilege. That is, unlike most Americans, and a growing number of Canadians, I am not fat. I am sure that it has helped my career. My early jobs were doing hard physical labour. Doing work like this you'll either lose weight or your job. Short people, fat people, gay people, people who stutter, people who limp, people who don't do well in school are just some examples of people who have been discriminated against, often even in law, even though these conditions are at least partially, often largely hereditary.





The 125th anniversary issue of National Geographic, which appeared last October, is dedicated to photography.



One of the most interesting parts was a short article portraying some Americans who are of mixed race heritage.



Each photo was captioned by three categories of classification.


First, there was a fairly anthropological description of their actual heritage, the kind of thing you'd get from DNA testing and other genealogical data.

Second, there was a category called "self-identification", that is, what these people call themselves, which they admit can change depending on who asks and why they want to know.

Which brings us to the third category, which is what these mixed race people call themselves on the official census form. Interestingly, of the 18 individual portraits of mixed race people, 7 marked "black" on the census form, 1 indicated "black/white", while 1 marked "white", so there is obviously some caché to being black these days.





Monster Gardener's excellent reply brings to mind a list I recently saw of organizations founded by white people to help black people. There are dozens and dozens of them, and I'm sure this list was not comprehensive. The author of this list challenged readers to find an organization established by black people to help white people. Of course some people, probably racists, think that no white people need help.



Here's a thought. If people want to get into lawsuits, how about demanding reparations from their parents?

Thank YOU VERY MUCH for your post, Apollonius.

Monster Gardener's excellent reply

And for the VERY Kind Words......

Your Friend,
MG

[Simple Minded]

Okay. Let's get away from slavery and talk about discrimination.



Zack,

I'm a beneficiary of slim privilege. That is, unlike most Americans, and a growing number of Canadians, I am not fat. I am sure that it has helped my career. My early jobs were doing hard physical labour. Doing work like this you'll either lose weight or your job. Short people, fat people, gay people, people who stutter, people who limp, people who don't do well in school are just some examples of people who have been discriminated against, often even in law, even though these conditions are at least partially, often largely hereditary.





The 125th anniversary issue of National Geographic, which appeared last October, is dedicated to photography.



One of the most interesting parts was a short article portraying some Americans who are of mixed race heritage.



Each photo was captioned by three categories of classification.


First, there was a fairly anthropological description of their actual heritage, the kind of thing you'd get from DNA testing and other genealogical data.

Second, there was a category called "self-identification", that is, what these people call themselves, which they admit can change depending on who asks and why they want to know.

Which brings us to the third category, which is what these mixed race people call themselves on the official census form. Interestingly, of the 18 individual portraits of mixed race people, 7 marked "black" on the census form, 1 indicated "black/white", while 1 marked "white", so there is obviously some caché to being black these days.





Monster Gardener's excellent reply brings to mind a list I recently saw of organizations founded by white people to help black people. There are dozens and dozens of them, and I'm sure this list was not comprehensive. The author of this list challenged readers to find an organization established by black people to help white people. Of course some people, probably racists, think that no white people need help.



Here's a thought. If people want to get into lawsuits, how about demanding reparations from their parents?

Two excellent posts Apollonius! Thanks.

I also have the been beneficiary of "slim" privilege on occasion.

I think "society" views the obese as somewhat undisciplined.

On other occasions I have been the beneficiary of "keeping quiet and appearing wise" privilege....... often when I had no idea what the heck was going on....

[Zack Morris]

Good for a laff Zack Mprris. The South was majority Democrat in every category, Senators, House of Representatives, Governors, state legislators until 1994, when Democrats woke up in shock and anger that the crackers left them. I was there Zack Morris and you have no idea what you are talking about.

I showed you data that shows exactly why the shift happened. Today's Republican party are the willing heirs to Southern bigotry.

A similar shift happened in the northeast: once solid Republican territory, it became Democratic. But for some reason, you're as quiet as a mouse peeing on cotton about that. I don't hear you claiming northeastern liberalism as quintessentially Republican.

And what does this have to do with anything. Do you think about any of this stuff before you hit submit.

What it means is that you cannot equate the values of modern, urban Democrats on the coasts with southern Democrats from a generation or two ago. The people haven't migrated and the values haven't changed.

Yes. The GOP owns a far less racist south. Today the South doesn't seem any more or less racist than any other place in the country. And we're happy to have them. If they get real racist again we'll hand 'em back to you. They and the Reverend Wright/La Raza wing of the party should get along real well.

As was demonstrated in the reparations thread, Reverend Wright was probably onto something. Preach it, brother: God damn America!

There is no voter suppression in the US.

Disenfranchisement of minorities is a longstanding objective of the modern Republican party.

Name one single historical item I've ever revised ever ever ever in my time in the Spengworld, or we can add this as yet another false charge or lie from Zack Morris. One singe instance. Now.

Pretty much everything you say about America and its founding ideals is revisionism. The truth is, this was a society built on exploitation of other human beings the likes of which had not been seen in the Western world since antiquity. America was never farther from its ideals than in the past, during those bygone eras you like to reminisce about.

Bo and Luke Duke fighting for slavery and Jim Crow one CBS episode at a time.

Always good for a laugh, Mr. P.

What does that have to do you with guys helping white people enormously and doing nothing whatsoever for black people.

Why did you do that?

A large part of this country, mostly Republican-voting and which -- as you say -- controls numerous state governments and has control of nearly half of the federal legislature hate hate hate the thought of helping black people.

And of course now that black people have done worse under obama than any other group, neither can you.

They've done far better under Obama than under Jim Crow, that's for sure. Obama alone can't reverse the legacy of centuries of oppression and the problems blacks are facing now are in line with what they've faced in previous recessions. Black unemployment always outpaces white unemployment by similar amounts. Obama can only be faulted for being unable to change centuries of deeply ingrained racism in the span of a few years.

[Zack Morris]

What percentage of mortgages were backed by GSEs? Do you know the figure?

Yes I do.

Then you would understand quite well that most of these mortgages were not constructed or underwritten by the government but by the initiative of the private sector. It was the private sector, from large banks and insurers down to small-time lenders and loan officers, who created this mess. It was the banks who conceived and promulgated the idea of securitized mortgages and who were responsible for assessing the risks of the speculative derivative positions they were putting on, not the government. The underlying demand was fueled primarily by the private sector and it was mostly private sector -- not GSE-backed -- mortgages that collapsed.

Risk management is solely the responsibility of the counterparties involved in derivatives transactions.

[Zack Morris]

The part about all the large number of black slaveholders is very well documented, and it's good to remember that a black person in the U.S. is actually more likely to be descended from a slaveholder than a white person! Remember: not one white person in a hundred has a slaveholder in their ancestry.

This is largely missing the point. Slavery, while the most egregious of offenses committed by the United States against black citizens, was not the only form of systematic discrimination against them. Racism is deeply rooted in American culture and even those whites who did not themselves own slaves supported the institution because they equated their own material success and freedom in the New World with the enslavement of other human beings. America's early economic success was made possible primarily by slave labor. Slaves quite literally built the country. It is not just the slaveholders who benefited from this.

The most basic piece of information is the part that most people still can't quite wrap their minds around, which is that virtually all slaves were sold to Europeans by other Africans. In the comments section there is mention of how the stereotypical cotton plantation was actually a short-lived phenomenon dating from sometime after the invention of the cotton gin. The point is well made that before then, slavery in the U.S. was concentrated in domestic endeavours without the long hours in the field and the sepraration of families that industrialization of agriculture entailed (something that had similar consequences for "free" white workers as well).

The role of Africans in helping support the slave trade is well known and hardly controversial. But it is a distraction and in no way diminishes the role of Europeans and Americans in perpetrating horror the scale of which the world had never seen before.

I disagree with your characterization as slave labor in the era of the cotton gin as being primarily domestic. Right up until emancipation, harsh agricultural labor was widespread.

The statistics on lynching, a loaded word if there ever was one, are something I've looked into before, and are also interesting. No details here, but the image in people's minds is that these poor fellows were innocent victims of "racism". But usually, of course, this was not really the case. The great majority had committed heinous crimes. And as the article says, in most states, most lynchings were of white guys

The systematic and often violent persecution of blacks in the Jim Crow era is well attested to. And to this day, the criminal justice system is an uncomfortable reminder of what this nation has done to blacks.

[Zack Morris]

I'm a beneficiary of slim privilege. That is, unlike most Americans, and a growing number of Canadians, I am not fat. I am sure that it has helped my career. My early jobs were doing hard physical labour. Doing work like this you'll either lose weight or your job. Short people, fat people, gay people, people who stutter, people who limp, people who don't do well in school are just some examples of people who have been discriminated against, often even in law, even though these conditions are at least partially, often largely hereditary.

I'm not a big fan of expansive definitions of "privilege". I think this is a disingenuous point you are making but it's not the first time -- and won't be the last -- that I've seen it.

Suffering an individual impairment is very different from suffering systematic discrimination due to one's identity. Here are some key reasons why:

1. In one case, unequal outcomes are the result of unequal ability. In the other case, unequal outcomes are the result of how other people define you. That is to say, it is their impairment, not your own, that is handicapping you.

2. In one case, your equal status as a human being is assumed. In the other case, the very nature of your humanity is judged to be different and, usually, flawed. You are identified as a different kind of human and possibly not even a human at all, and treated accordingly. Derogatory assumptions about your behavior, intelligence, emotions, and culture are projected onto you by others. This identification is not made on an individual basis and is defined in terms of your heritage, meaning it follows your descendants, your blood relatives, and taints those who associate with you.

3. In one case, one can free themselves of their impairment and any prejudiced judgments associated with it. In the other case, they cannot.


Fat people are not likely to be enslaved or terrorized for generations with the full blessing of the law. Friends and lovers will not change their opinion of you or abandon you if they discover you have a fat parent or relative. Society becomes concerned when the proportion of fat people increases and it is relatively uncontroversial to suggest helping them. When the proportion of non-white people increases, the result is harsh anti-immigration rhetoric, dark insinuations that our culture will be destroyed, and websites like VDare.

Do you concede that there are some important differences here?

First, there was a fairly anthropological description of their actual heritage, the kind of thing you'd get from DNA testing and other genealogical data.

Second, there was a category called "self-identification", that is, what these people call themselves, which they admit can change depending on who asks and why they want to know.

Which brings us to the third category, which is what these mixed race people call themselves on the official census form. Interestingly, of the 18 individual portraits of mixed race people, 7 marked "black" on the census form, 1 indicated "black/white", while 1 marked "white", so there is obviously some caché to being black these days.

I saw the same article. You have drawn a rather novel inference from it. I would say that people mark 'black' because they are aware of how others define them. It has been that way all their lives.

[Mr. Perfect]

I showed you data that shows exactly why the shift happened.

No you didn't.

Today's Republican party are the willing heirs to Southern bigotry.

No we aren't. As the South became less racist we welcomed them. Now they are no more or less bigoted than any other segment of society.

What it means is that you cannot equate the values of modern, urban Democrats on the coasts with southern Democrats from a generation or two ago.

Yes I can. They were happy to be allies with them right up to 1994. Perfectly happy. They had no complaint about Southern Democrats at all. Bigoted Southern Whites, who were allowed all positions and privileges available in the Democrat Party.

As was demonstrated in the reparations thread, Reverend Wright was probably onto something. Preach it, brother: God damn America!

I would just say God Damn Democrats. That would work much better. And I think they are damned if I was to be honest.

Disenfranchisement of minorities is a longstanding objective of the modern Republican party.

No it isn't.

Looks like another false charge from Zack Morris.

Pretty much everything you say about America and its founding ideals is revisionism.

But you didn't name one single example. Do you know why.

Looks like another false charge from Zack Morris.

The truth is, this was a society built on exploitation of other human beings the likes of which had not been seen in the Western world since antiquity.

The only thing you ever been able to do competently is make vague, vacuous statements with little meaning or specificity.

America was never farther from its ideals than in the past, during those bygone eras you like to reminisce about.

Citation needed, on many levels.

Always good for a laugh, Mr. P.

Just hitting your softballs.

A large part of this country, mostly Republican-voting and which -- as you say -- controls numerous state governments and has control of nearly half of the federal legislature hate hate hate the thought of helping black people.

So you have a lot in common with Republican voting states. What are you getting at.

They've done far better under Obama than under Jim Crow, that's for sure.

Well Democrats. You knew Jim Crow was a Democrat right. Do you think about anything you say before you hit submit.

That's the new standard, we're doing better than Jim Crow. Hope and change is now, hey, better than Jim Crow.

Obama alone can't reverse the legacy of centuries of oppression and the problems blacks are facing now are in line with what they've faced in previous recessions.

Black unemployment always outpaces white unemployment by similar amounts. Obama can only be faulted for being unable to change centuries of deeply ingrained racism in the span of a few years.

Actually he can be faulted for making rich liberal whites incredibly rich and brutally punishing the black community, probably forever.

Way to go. Mission accomplished.

[Mr. Perfect]

Then you would understand quite well that most of these mortgages were not constructed or underwritten by the government but by the initiative of the private sector.

Who were under threat of lawsuit if they didn't write them.

In fact barack obama himself was involved in one such lawsuit.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/03/with- ... americans/

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.

As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes with clean credit ratings, following a decade in which Obama and other progressives pushed banks to provide mortgages to poor African Americans.

The startling failure rate among Obama’s private sector clients was discovered during The Daily Caller’s review of previously unpublished court information from the lawsuit that a young Obama worked on as an attorney for the lead plaintiff. [RELATED: Learn about the 186 class action plaintiffs]

Since the mortgage bubble burst, some of his former clients are calling for a policy reversal.

“If you see some people don’t make enough money to afford the mortgage, why would you give them a loan?” asked Obama client John Buchanan. “There should be some type of regulation against giving people loans they can’t afford.”


Yeah.

It was the private sector, from large banks and insurers down to small-time lenders and loan officers, who created this mess.

Freddie and Fannie are not private sector.

It was the banks who conceived and promulgated the idea of securitized mortgages

There is nothing wrong with securitized mortgages. Most forms of debt and equity are liquid and traded on exchanges of one type or other. It's literally no big deal.

and who were responsible for assessing the risks of the speculative derivative positions they were putting on, not the government. The underlying demand was fueled primarily by the private sector and it was mostly private sector -- not GSE-backed -- mortgages that collapsed.

Yeah, Freddie Fannie bailout was/will be between 1/3 and 1/2 of TARP.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/true-co ... n-cbo-says

And the "underlying demand" was "fueled" by a Keynesian RE bubble. Which could have resolved in any number of ways, but the Democrat subprime mortgage bomb sealed our fate.

Back to the drawing board Zack Morris.

Risk management is solely the responsibility of the counterparties involved in derivatives transactions.

Risk management is everyone's responsibility Zack Morris.

This guy too.

LGAglxqWuzE

You should see the risk that Franklin Raines assessed here:

IyqYY72PeRM

[Apollonius]

I saw the same article.You have drawn a rather novel inference from it. I would say that people mark 'black' because they are aware of how others define them. It has been that way all their lives.

That's covered by the "self identification" category. More likely they are thinking that answering "black" on the census form will enable them to claim special consideration for education and employment.




President Obama is a perfect illustration of this trend. Ethnographcially, he is half Indo-European, half Nilo-Saharan, the Luos being themselves a mixed-race group, late-comers to Kenya, part Caucasian, part black.

He identifies as "black", and I assume he ticks the "black" category on the census form. I doubt that he does it just because someone told him that's how others define him. In fact, that's a rather condescending view of your president, isn't it? Who really can know why he calls himself "black", but certainly he sees advantage in it and has been able to capitalize on that advantage.

[Apollonius]

Zack,


You live in the city where the New York Times is published. They post a feature article with a race angle every single day. It's a New York obsession with the city's chattering classes.


Some while back the NYT published a whole series of articles devoted to the migration of black people away from northern cities, and I posted a couple of them here:



viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1258&p=45757

Republicans own the south and its values now.

From one of those articles:

“My grandmother’s generation left the South and came to the North to escape segregation and racism,” she said. “Now, I am going back because New York has become like the old South in its racial attitudes.”

Many black New Yorkers who are already in the South say they have little desire to return to the city, even though they get wistful at the mention of the subways or Harlem nights.

Danitta Ross, 39, a real estate broker who used to live in Queens, said she moved to Atlanta four years ago after her company, responding to the surge in black New Yorkers moving south, began offering relocation seminars. She helped organize them, and became intrigued.

Ms. Ross said she had grown up hearing stories at the dinner table about segregation. She said the Atlanta she discovered was a cosmopolitan place of classical music concerts, interracial marriage and opulent houses owned by black people.

A single mother, she said that for $150,000, she was buying a seven-room house, with a three-car garage, on a nice plot of land.

Ms. Ross said she had experienced some culture shock in the South, and had been surprised to find that blacks tended to self-segregate, even in affluent neighborhoods.

Your experience is bound to be radically different from mine. Vancouver is every bit as multi-cultural as New York City, yet you rarely hear about race. Canada does have a history of actions by the government which would be considered highly objectionable by current standards, such as the Head Tax imposed on many Asian immigrants. By current standards almost all human life on Planet Earth was highly objectionable fifty or one hundred years ago.


Yet we find other things to talk about. Music, gardening, hiking up a mountain, or even getting a decent job paying job now that no one pays head tax anymore and instead people pay to get into the country through immigrant "investment" or "business start-up" plans . It's too bad Americans don't talk about the weather more often. Anything but why you think someone else owes you an apology for something you probably never heard of, had absolutely nothing to do with, and almost certainly isn't the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth anyway.



Well, I notice you're not really advocating reparations. You're just trolling for "racists", that is, people who have different ideas about race relations than you.

[monster_gardener]

I saw the same article.You have drawn a rather novel inference from it. I would say that people mark 'black' because they are aware of how others define them. It has been that way all their lives.

That's covered by the "self identification" category. More likely they are thinking that answering "black" on the census form will enable them to claim special consideration for education and employment.




President Obama is a perfect illustration of this trend. Ethnographcially, he is half Indo-European, half Nilo-Saharan, the Luos being themselves a mixed-race group, late-comers to Kenya, part Caucasian, part black.

He identifies as "black", and I assume he ticks the "black" category on the census form. I doubt that he does it just because someone told him that's how others define him. In fact, that's a rather condescending view of your president, isn't it? Who really can know why he calls himself "black", but certainly he sees advantage in it and has been able to capitalize on that advantage.

Thank You VERY MUCH for your post, Apollonius.

The funny thing is that President Bill Clinton also identifies as Black and considers himself America's First Black President!

He is also still absolutely furious with a Lie-O oops I mean a Luo like obama The Lie that Walks allegedly playing the Race Card against him....

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=bi ... +president

[Simple Minded]

Zack,

You live in the city where the New York Times is published. They post a feature article with a race angle every single day. It's a New York obsession with the city's chattering classes.

Your experience is bound to be radically different from mine. Vancouver is every bit as multi-cultural as New York City, yet you rarely hear about race. Canada does have a history of actions by the government which would be considered highly objectionable by current standards, such as the Head Tax imposed on many Asian immigrants. By current standards almost all human life on Planet Earth was highly objectionable fifty or one hundred years ago.

Well put Apollonius!

In several discussions with friends, we have all noted the phenomena that living within 75 miles of NYC profoundly influences one's world view. For some, it is the perspective that the world view of the NYT is the only valid view of reality. It really does seem to "color" (pun intended) one's perspective. IMSMO, it seems to be something akin to "snow blindness."

Thankfully, once one moves back outside this circle, one regains one's previously acute faculties of observation, and often can not believe the perspectives one held while living in the belly of the beast.

It's too bad Americans don't talk about the weather more often. Anything but why you think someone else owes you an apology for something you probably never heard of, had absolutely nothing to do with, and almost certainly isn't the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth anyway.

Thankfully, huge swaths of America don't buy into this "Life is unjust on the cosmic level!" ideology. It seems to be very much a generational view of those under the age of 30 (the 1960s battle cry of "Never trust anyone over 30!" will never go out of style), as well as the battle cry of those who wish to rule the world while projecting the false front of saving the world. Especially relevant to the MSM. If you can't convince Fred he is a victim, Fred might not think you a savior, and have little use for both you and whatever you are selling.

Looking at any large population allows one plenty of data points to support one's prejudices and biases. The projection of "all that I choose to see is all that I am willing to acknowledge as existing in the entire world" is one of the fascinating aspects of humanity.

[monster_gardener]

Thank You Very Much For Maintaining the Forum, Admins Typhoon & YMix

I had been listening to a 48 Hours Program about 2 perps who did a home invasion in St. Louis where one woman was killed and 2 other people including a policewoman were shot.

I decided to look up more about the case....

Here is one normal link I found....

Lovadina's world was upturned Oct. 5, 2009, when she was critically hurt in an early morning robbery and shooting that also claimed the life of Gina Stallis, 34, a nurse and mother of two, and left Nicholas Koenig injured. Lovadina and Koenig were held up at gunpoint by two men on the street outside the house, then forced back inside.

During the course of the next harrowing minutes, the gunmen directed the adults inside to the floor, prepared to start taking items from the home and demanded that Stallis lead them to the basement. But Lovadina, who did not have her service weapon on her, said she believed the gunmen were going to attack, rape or kill Stallis, so she charged at one of the robbers. Gunfire popped. When the burst was over, Stallis had suffered a fatal gunshot wound, Lovadina took five bullets from point-blank range and Koenig was shot three times.

"It was complete chaos," Lovadina said. The robbers left with about $9 in cash, a cellphone and a small amount of jewelry.

Two men have since been convicted of first-degree murder and an assortment of other felonies, including assault, robbery and kidnapping. Mario Coleman, 24, and LeDale Nathan Jr., 18, each have been sentenced to life in prison for the crimes.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crim ... a9225.html


But I found also found another site, The National Black Foot Soldier Network that was justifying this and other similar crimes as reparations....

Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Gina Stallis Reparations Protest (UPDATE)! Crowned St. Louis Protester Mario Coleman Found "Guilty;" Missouri Soldiers Condemn Verdict, "Reparations offender responsible for own death."

Although it has not been confirmed, St. Louis County Black Foot Soldiers contacts say National Black Foot Soldier Network General Cedishon Angelou, who hails from St. Louis, did attend the State's illegal trial against NBFSN icon Mario Coleman.

“That the racially terrorist United States government hasn’t and doesn’t educate whites on how the legacy of slavery has created the impoverished conditions that do continue to influence and trap our people doesn’t mean we have to excuse their ignorance."

Coleman has been being held in the State regime's custody since the reportedly daring 2009 reparations home invasion of alleged non direct Trans Atlantic slave trade offender Gina Stallis.

In May, alleged protester LeDale Nathan Jr. was illegally sentenced to seventeen life sentences plus another seventy-five years for the courageous protest in which the activists' lives were also threatened by a racist St. Louis police regime terrorist.

The predominantly white jury reportedly found the acclaimed reparations protester guilty of first degree murder. St. Louis County Soldiers, however, allege offender Stallis turned the protest violent and forced Coleman and Nathan, into a situation where they had to defend themselves.

“That the racially terrorist United States government hasn’t and doesn’t educate whites on how the legacy of slavery has created the impoverished conditions that do continue to influence and trap our people doesn’t mean we have to excuse their ignorance. Whether they are non-direct offenders or direct offenders, all whites are reparations offenders; and, our brothers have the right to claim any of their property at anytime." St. Louis County Black Foot Soldier Munder Sykes.

St. Louis County and Missouri Black Foot Soldiers are demanding both Coleman and Nathan be released into their custody.
Posted by Yusef Douglas at 3:43 AM
Labels: Gina Stallis Reparations Offender, Ledale Nathan, Mario Coleman Guilty, St. Louis County Black Foot Soldiers
23 comments:

St. Louis Soldier Ronnie Clay said...

What we do know is that brothers Ledale & Mario are the heroes in standing up against this family of generational race criminals who were in and are still in denial that they are reparations offenders.

The beautiful thing is that Mario & Ledale were not brain washed by white media and hip hop music and knew better than to fall into the white created pathology that encourages us to make victims out of our own people but instead to be politically active in the fight to secure justice for our reparations that continues to be denied.

St. Louis Soldier Ronnie Clay
December 6, 2011 at 9:47 AM
Certified St. Louis Souljahs said...

“That the racially terrorist United States government hasn’t and doesn’t educate whites on how the legacy of slavery has created the impoverished conditions that do continue to influence and trap our people doesn’t mean we have to excuse their ignorance."

Gina Stallis was an unrepentant reparations offender who expected her ignorance to be her excuse. MLK says a men have a responsibility to break unjust laws. Laws preventing us from taking our rightful reparations are justice.

Certified St. Louis Souljahs
December 7, 2011 at 3:58 AM
Anonymous said...

Glad they were found guilty.
December 7, 2011 at 12:35 PM

http://nationalblackfootsoldiernetwork. ... pdate.html


I was going to write that I hoped that this was a bad joke

But apparently per the Southern Poverty Law Center this and similar sites are VERY Weird but real.....

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is an American nonprofit civil rights organization noted for its legal victories against white supremacist groups, its legal representation for victims of hate groups, its classification of militias and extremist organizations, and its educational programs that promote tolerance.[2][3][4] The SPLC also classifies and lists hate groups – organizations that in its opinion "attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics."[5] The SPLC's hate group list has been the source of some controversy.[6][7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_P ... Law_Center

Intelligence Report, Summer 2011, Issue Number: 142
'Black Foot Soldiers' Blog Network Cheers Murders of Police Officers

By Leah Nelson

On Nov. 29, 2009, a fugitive identified by police as Maurice Clemmons walked into a Lakewood, Wash., coffee shop and shot four police officers to death execution-style. Two days later, Clemmons was shot to death by a Seattle police officer.

The shocking case made national headlines, mostly scrutinizing former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, whose decision to reduce Clemmons' 108-year prison sentence for a string of felonies during his teen years led to the convict's release in 2000. But the case also generated a second controversial story line: While most people were saddened by the tragedy, one shadowy group of extreme fanatics cheered the officers' deaths.

The day after Clemmons died, two blogs — The Last Crusade and Black Male Felon — announced that the Seattle chapter of a little-known organization called the National Black Foot Soldiers Network (NBFSN) would hold a rally to celebrate Clemmons as a "Crowned BOW (Black on White) martyr" who did his part to destroy the "white terror racist police regime."

...........

God Damn America Day

The NBFSN lays out some of its thinking on Collective Underground, a site that links to several blogs in the network and says it is a part of the "Underprivileged Media Network." Among other things, NBSFN claims to be a "non religious movement whose mission and ideology are rooted in securing reparations for the unrestituted for crimes committed by America against the millions of descendants of the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade."

The substance of the network's message can be distilled into four themes.

Whites owe reparations for centuries of oppressing blacks. Blacks who commit crimes against whites are sometimes referred to as "slave avengers" or "reparations protestors."

White police are "state commissioned racial terrorists." Black officers are viewed as race traitors.

The people who call themselves Jews today are actually impostors and "birthright thieves." Black people are the "real" descendants of the Hebrews of the Bible, the true chosen people. (This idea, commonly known as Black Hebrew Israelism, is widespread among black nationalist groups and is one of many that give the lie to the network's self-description as a "non religious movement.")

God hates white people and, in a 2012 cataclysm that the bloggers call the "Ultraviolet Holocaust," all whites will die. They declare that ultraviolet light — because of its link to skin cancer — "is the Fire of the 2nd Rapture of God." "The Sun of God," they say, "hates white people."

The bloggers certainly hate America. On its 2008 announcement of "God Damn America Day," memorializing New York City's police officers' accidental shooting of a young black man, the network offered a prayer including the lines, "Lord bless neither this land nor her people. Not even her itty bitty children are worthy to be saved. Won't you send another flood and wash them all away? … Let the sun stay in the sky, in fires let them fry."

..........

In fact, it seems very likely that they include many of the hundreds of Nuwaubians who largely disappeared from view after their leader's imprisonment. They also may well include former followers of Yahweh ben Yahweh, a terrifying cult leader who was convicted of conspiracy to murder white people as an initiation rite at his Florida-based Nation of Yahweh, which reportedly once owned properties around the country valued at $100 million. Since his death in 2007, hundreds of his followers in the U.S. and Canada have dropped out of sight as well.

Whether they are active Nuwaubians, people drawn from other black supremacist cults like the Nation of Yahweh, or freelancers who have created an entirely new concept, the National Black Foot Soldiers Network has brought Dwight York's apocalyptic hatred of whites into the 21st century. York, whose release isn't scheduled until the 22nd century, would be proud.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/i ... e-officers

Another reason to be armed..........