Obama's Reparations

[chriswallace112]

Originally Posted by 7960

But that analogy is flawed.

100 years ago my great-great-great grand uncle burned down your great-great-great grand uncle's house and now you're asking me to build you a new one. That's fair?

Well, on this point, I think my analogy is quite accurate. First, it wasn't one house it was the homes of generations of people.

Second, African-Americans secured civil rights for all about 50 years ago. In historical terms, that was yesterday.

Third, Justice does not know time.

Lastly, I don't think that my point on reparations is clear in one respect (I think this one most people will find difficult to accept): the person(s) who needs to repair race relations are the citizens of America... the nation... and that includes me. That house that you're building, I'll be building too... we are part of America. The immigrant who did nothing to contribute to the problem.. but wants to be part of America.. he will build too. We will all do this together so we can be united. It's not white people that I want to pay... this is not vengeance or racism... it's to make Americans of all colors, creeds, etc. have truly equal opportunities. America simply needs to fix this one thing for race relations to improve.

[7960]

Originally Posted by chriswallace112

Well, on this point, I think my analogy is quite accurate. First, it wasn't one house it was the homes of generations of people.

Hey, sweet. So 500 white guys burned down 500 black guys' homes a hundred years ago and now you want me and 499 friends to buy you and 499 of your friends a new home.

Second, African-Americans secured civil rights for all about 50 years ago. In historical terms, that was yesterday.

Oh. When you said "reparations for slavery" in your first post I thought you meant reparations for slavery. Now you're talking about reparations for not having secured civil rights.

Third, Justice does not know time.

Yes it does.

Statute of limitations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lastly, I don't think that my point on reparations is clear in one respect (I think this one most people will find difficult to accept): the person(s) who needs to repair race relations are the citizens of America... the nation... and that includes me. That house that you're building, I'll be building too... we are part of America.

So you're going to throw a dollar in the pot, too, but you're going to get a new house back? How can I sign up for that deal?

The immigrant who did nothing to contribute to the problem.. but wants to be part of America.. he will build too. We will all do this together so we can be united. It's not white people that I want to pay... this is not vengeance or racism... it's to make Americans of all colors, creeds, etc. have truly equal opportunities. America simply needs to fix this one thing for race relations to improve.

And I can't think of any other way to say this............. if america tries to "fix this one thing" then

1. there will be one more "thing" once that one is exhausted because if you give a man a fish............., and

2. specifically singling out blacks to help because "america was shitty to them" will go exactly in the opposite direction of "fix(ing) this one thing." It will create even more of a divide than we have now.

But ignoring that obama does not support reparations (as you've done for this entire thread) PLEASE do me a favor and tell obama to mention support for reparations in the next debate. I want to hear the audience gasp and watch his numbers go down faster than an intern in the oval office.


Lastly (and the irony of this one is killing me) since obama *IS* against reparations (I'm a link) you are being racist against a fellow black man by continuing to assume that he'd do something about it for the sole reason that he's black.

[chriswallace112]

Originally Posted by 7960

Hey, sweet. So 500 white guys burned down 500 black guys' homes a hundred years ago and now you want me and 499 friends to buy you and 499 of your friends a new home.

Oh. When you said "reparations for slavery" in your first post I thought you meant reparations for slavery. Now you're talking about reparations for not having secured civil rights.

Yes it does.

Statute of limitations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So you're going to throw a dollar in the pot, too, but you're going to get a new house back? How can I sign up for that deal?

And I can't think of any other way to say this............. if america tries to "fix this one thing" then

1. there will be one more "thing" once that one is exhausted because if you give a man a fish............., and

2. specifically singling out blacks to help because "america was shitty to them" will go exactly in the opposite direction of "fix(ing) this one thing." It will create even more of a divide than we have now.

But ignoring that obama does not support reparations (as you've done for this entire thread) PLEASE do me a favor and tell obama to mention support for reparations in the next debate. I want to hear the audience gasp and watch his numbers go down faster than an intern in the oval office.


Lastly (and the irony of this one is killing me) since obama *IS* against reparations (I'm a link) you are being racist against a fellow black man by continuing to assume that he'd do something about it for the sole reason that he's black.

On the first part... we disagree. Not having civil rights was an extension of slavery. Struggling step by step from the status of property to the status of human being is what created the problems we have today and is what needs repairing. About the statute of limitations: law and justice are not synonyms.

Obama has not come out in support of making payments to descendants of slaves... but I am pointing out two things: first, that reparations can't merely be a check and that the modern definition of reparations needs to be more inclusive of other programs whose intent and effect is reparation. It's a broader view. Second, that Obama has indicated that he would concentrate on investing in education and having diversity in the workforce. Here's a recent quote from an article "Obama wants to expand faith-based programs - Barack Obama News - MSNBC.com" (where he also proposes helping churches and religious orgs):

"he [Obama] also proposes a $500 million per year program to provide summer learning for 1 million poor children to help close achievement gaps with white and wealthier students"

I think that his ability to communicate effectively, his life experiences, and his positions as he has expressed will bring us closer to this goal. It's not merely because he is black... Condoleeza Rice is black. I don't think he can achieve it, but I think that he will be able to bring up a national discussion about this without thinking that this issue is one for the black panthers or the Farrakhans of the world. He's the best hope... but look at the resistance I've been getting... it's unlikely to move beyond the dialogue stage. But at least we can talk about it.

[7960]

Originally Posted by chriswallace112

On the first part... we disagree. Not having civil rights was an extension of slavery.

Then we need to pay reparations to the irish and italians and polish and chinese and .......

Obama has not come out in support of making payments to descendants of slaves...

No. In fact when directly asked he said we should be continuing affirmative action. He had an opportunity to open a door to reparations and he chose to keep it shut.

So again......................... if I expected a white southerner to have a certain stance for no other reason than he was a white southerner that would make me racist. You expect obama to have a certain stance for no other reason than he's black. What does that make you?

Here's a recent quote from an article "Obama wants to expand faith-based programs - Barack Obama News - MSNBC.com" (where he also proposes helping churches and religious orgs):

He did not say that when asked about reparations. This is what he said,

During his 2004 senate race against Obama, Republican Alan Keyes endorsed the idea.

"And for a generation, two generations you exempt them from taxation," Keyes said in August 2004.

Obama's responded, "The legacy of slavery is immeasurable, but the best strategies for moving forward would be vigorously enforcing our anti-discrimination laws in education and job training."

http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/slav....2.335289.html

Why are you posting an answer to a different question?

..... but look at the resistance I've been getting...

If this is discouraging you, just wait. I'm being polite about it. If you brought it up among a ....... uh ........ less educated segment of society you'd get a much ........... hmm ......... "less refined" response.

[chriswallace112]

Originally Posted by 7960

Then we need to pay reparations to the irish and italians and polish and chinese and .......


No. In fact when directly asked he said we should be continuing affirmative action. He had an opportunity to open a door to reparations and he chose to keep it shut.

So again......................... if I expected a white southerner to have a certain stance for no other reason than he was a white southerner that would make me racist. You expect obama to have a certain stance for no other reason than he's black. What does that make you?

He did not say that when asked about reparations. This is what he said,

During his 2004 senate race against Obama, Republican Alan Keyes endorsed the idea.

"And for a generation, two generations you exempt them from taxation," Keyes said in August 2004.

Obama's responded, "The legacy of slavery is immeasurable, but the best strategies for moving forward would be vigorously enforcing our anti-discrimination laws in education and job training."

cbs2chicago.com - Will Reparations Stance Hurt Obama Campaign?

Why are you posting an answer to a different question?

If this is discouraging you, just wait. I'm being polite about it. If you brought it up among a ....... uh ........ less educated segment of society you'd get a much ........... hmm ......... "less refined" response.

The civil rights movement was mainly propelled by African-Americans due to the legacy of slavery... and those rights were eventually granted universally... an example of how one group agitating for a positive change can help the whole nation. Furthermore, it's not because he is black (he's half white too) but for all the other reasons I stated.

Again, the issue of reparations is not merely cutting a check. Obama is against that. But instead of using that money and putting it in the hands of the individual, Obama has already said that he would spend at least $500 million on minority community schools. Where the check goes is the question... but checks need to by written in order to right this historical "birth defect" of our nation. Also, even in the quote above, emphasizing diversity in the workplace puts a hole in the argument that "racism is ok in the private sector" (as a practice).

If we want to limit the definition of reparations to literally writing a check and handing it to descendant of a slave... then maybe I don't agree, I'd have to think about it.

On the other hand, I would like that check to directly benefit minorities, especially African-Americans, for what was done to them... whether it's put into our schools, into tax exemptions, into churches, or in our hands that's the only way that we can "repair" race relations now, generations removed from when the crime took place.

Is Obama for reparations? At this point his policies seemed to help the common man, he will mobilize the whole power of government to help the less fortunate, and he will not shy away from taking hard stances against the right and the rich... but like you said, he can't bring it up because it's politically sensitive... but when he becomes president he will have to answer to his constituencies that elected him and to history. Like I said before, I doubt he can do it, but I believe that he can turn this issue from a political hot potato to something we can actually discuss in public.

[Simius]

Originally Posted by chriswallace112

The civil rights movement was mainly propelled by African-Americans due to the legacy of slavery... and those rights were eventually granted universally... an example of how one group agitating for a positive change can help the whole nation. Furthermore, it's not because he is black (he's half white too) but for all the other reasons I stated.

Again, the issue of reparations is not merely cutting a check. Obama is against that. But instead of using that money and putting it in the hands of the individual, Obama has already said that he would spend at least $500 million on minority community schools. Where the check goes is the question... but checks need to by written in order to right this historical "birth defect" of our nation. Also, even in the quote above, emphasizing diversity in the workplace puts a hole in the argument that "racism is ok in the private sector" (as a practice).

If we want to limit the definition of reparations to literally writing a check and handing it to descendant of a slave... then maybe I don't agree, I'd have to think about it.

On the other hand, I would like that check to directly benefit minorities, especially African-Americans, for what was done to them... whether it's put into our schools, into tax exemptions, into churches, or in our hands that's the only way that we can "repair" race relations now, generations removed from when the crime took place.

Is Obama for reparations? At this point his policies seemed to help the common man, he will mobilize the whole power of government to help the less fortunate, and he will not shy away from taking hard stances against the right and the rich... but like you said, he can't bring it up because it's politically sensitive... but when he becomes president he will have to answer to his constituencies that elected him and to history. Like I said before, I doubt he can do it, but I believe that he can turn this issue from a political hot potato to something we can actually discuss in public.

As a liberal I have no shame in advocating redistribution of wealth to help the poor. (As long as it is done correctly)

But it shouldn't focus on minorities. It should focus on whoever is poor. That is where I disagree with you. If minorities are disproportionately poor, for whatever reason, doing it this way would help minorities disproportionately. Which is fine. But trying to funnel the money to minorities just because they are minorities would jump over a lot of people who are just as much in need but don't happen to have the exact same reasons their minority neighbors have for being in need. Hell, not even all minorities who are destitute are destitute due to the after effects of slavery/segregation etc.

Take race out of your equation and you'll get the more or less the same benefits as you are advocating. Except it will also help everyone else who is in the same boat as you AND as an added bonus you will get support from liberals like me who want to help the poor but don't want to help one segment of the poor at the expense of others who are just as poor and in just as much need for help.

I really think this is Obama's position. He isn't advocating helping minority schools because they are minority schools. He is advocating helping them because they need help, the schools being predominately minority is a side issue.

[chriswallace112]

Originally Posted by Simius

As a liberal I have no shame in advocating redistribution of wealth to help the poor. (As long as it is done correctly)

But it shouldn't focus on minorities. It should focus on whoever is poor. That is where I disagree with you. If minorities are disproportionately poor, for whatever reason, doing it this way would help minorities disproportionately. Which is fine. But trying to funnel the money to minorities just because they are minorities would jump over a lot of people who are just as much in need but don't happen to have the exact same reasons their minority neighbors have for being in need. Hell, not even all minorities who are destitute are destitute due to the after effects of slavery/segregation etc.

Take race out of your equation and you'll get the more or less the same benefits as you are advocating. Except it will also help everyone else who is in the same boat as you AND as an added bonus you will get support from liberals like me who want to help the poor but don't want to help one segment of the poor at the expense of others who are just as poor and in just as much need for help.

I really think this is Obama's position. He isn't advocating helping minority schools because they are minority schools. He is advocating helping them because they need help, the schools being predominately minority is a side issue.

I completely understand this argument and politically I think it is the smarter approach. But why can't we talk about race, especially when racism is the reason that today African-Americans are struggling? The politically expedient approach of not saying anything with regards to race because it is an uncomfortable discussion is the politics of the past.

What I hope for is a politician that can tackle these problems and be able to ask that question: does race affect socio-economic status? Why? And if so, what do ew do about it? This is what I think he can do and is why I support him.

As to your last point, I also agree that those who are in need should be helped in order to make all of America better. I just think we can't ignore race. Those in need who are in that position due to happenstance rather than due to oppression, deserve a chance to pick themselves up but also are personally responsible for being in that state. Those two situations are different. About Obama, he has made it a particular point in his speeches to talk about minorities needing help. He also has talked about helping those in need. I don't think it would be beyond him to do both since that's what he's advocating in speeches now.

I'm not for the wholesale redistribution of wealth, inequalities must exist in the world.. maybe not as pronounced as here in the US though. I think at least everyone should start from a more or less equal starting point... which was denied to the black community. I should be able to say that in politics without killing any candidate's chances at the polls... otherwise, America will stay in denial.

[illavbill]

Originally Posted by chriswallace112

I completely understand this argument and politically I think it is the smarter approach. But why can't we talk about race, especially when racism is the reason that today African-Americans are struggling? The politically expedient approach of not saying anything with regards to race because it is an uncomfortable discussion is the politics of the past.

What I hope for is a politician that can tackle these problems and be able to ask that question: does race affect socio-economic status? Why? And if so, what do ew do about it? This is what I think he can do and is why I support him.

As to your last point, I also agree that those who are in need should be helped in order to make all of America better. I just think we can't ignore race. Those in need who are in that position due to happenstance rather than due to oppression, deserve a chance to pick themselves up but also are personally responsible for being in that state. Those two situations are different. About Obama, he has made it a particular point in his speeches to talk about minorities needing help. He also has talked about helping those in need. I don't think it would be beyond him to do both since that's what he's advocating in speeches now.

I'm not for the wholesale redistribution of wealth, inequalities must exist in the world.. maybe not as pronounced as here in the US though. I think at least everyone should start from a more or less equal starting point... which was denied to the black community. I should be able to say that in politics without killing any candidate's chances at the polls... otherwise, America will stay in denial.

In this country today if you are poor or w/e it isn't because they're black or w/e race they may be. It is because they made poor decisions. Being African-American is NOT a disadvantage I know A LOT of African Americans who are doing VERY good for themselves and most of them didn't have rich parents or any special circumstances. I know plenty of whites that are total trashy idiots that put themselves in the predictament they're in right now.

Giving a certain race more help just because of the color of their skin isn't needed this is a total bullshit arguement. I'm all for helping PEOPLE out if they're having a hard time in life but only temporarily and not EXTRA shit because of their race. You sicken me the shit you're advocating is as racist as you can get.

[7960]

Originally Posted by chriswallace112

The politically expedient approach of not saying anything with regards to race because it is an uncomfortable discussion is the politics of the past.

And the politics of the future is to say "I'm black and generations ago people with my skin color were screwed so today I deserve more" is the politics of the future?

As to your last point, I also agree that those who are in need should be helped in order to make all of America better. I just think we can't ignore race.

So help everyone, just help the blacks more. That is exactly the blatant racism you've been complaining about through this entire thread.

I'm not for the wholesale redistribution of wealth,

Of course you're not. You've made it very clear you're only for the redistribution of wealth as it benefits blacks.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by chriswallace112

I completely understand this argument and politically I think it is the smarter approach. But why can't we talk about race, especially when racism is the reason that today African-Americans are struggling?

False. 100% False. Not all african americans are struggling. The ones that do struggle are not struggling because 'the man is keeping them down'. They have just as much opportunity as the rest of society. How about the white people that struggle? What is their excuse? They choose to manufacture meth, get knocked up and have a meth baby, stacking the odds against them and their child. They choose to do all that.

They are the problem, not their white skin color. Nearly everything is a choice today. When someone interviews for a job and tests positive for weed in the piss test...they didn't get hired because they smoke weed. Nobody today is going to deny a person a job because they are black. Black people do not struggle because they are black. People in general struggle because of choices they make. There are acceptions and events that sometimes there are no controls...those type deserve help to get on their feet.

[illavbill]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

False. 100% False. Not all african americans are struggling. The ones that do struggle are not struggling because 'the man is keeping them down'. They have just as much opportunity as the rest of society. How about the white people that struggle? What is their excuse? They choose to manufacture meth, get knocked up and have a meth baby, stacking the odds against them and their child. They choose to do all that.

They are the problem, not their white skin color. Nearly everything is a choice today. When someone interviews for a job and tests positive for weed in the piss test...they didn't get hired because they smoke weed. Nobody today is going to deny a person a job because they are black. Black people do not struggle because they are black. People in general struggle because of choices they make. There are acceptions and events that sometimes there are no controls...those type deserve help to get on their feet.

MF