|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
When Socialism comes, we will all really be color-blind.
|
On January 22 2016 09:25 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 08:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 22 2016 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2016 08:03 Deathstar wrote:On January 22 2016 07:47 Plansix wrote:On January 22 2016 07:39 Deathstar wrote:
I don't understand what the court case for this would even look like.
Defendant: White people in America
Plaintiff: Black people in America
Is reparations considered a serious claim? That, after 200 years, the modern day descendants of slaves are entitled to tax payer paid compensation? What is the logic? http://www.newsweek.com/slavery-reparations-could-cost-14-trillion-according-new-calculation-364141Its a talking point. If you take the number of slaves and the amount of unpaid labor caused by slavery, the prices is like 14 trillion. Which is a crazy number. But forget talking about it, just watch Season One, episode 18 of the West Wing, Six meetings before Lunch. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0745677/You have a liberal white house staffer talking to black appointee for assistant attorney general for civil rights about reparations and not agreeing on the topic. It pretty much sums up how its not viable or realistic, but a good thing to talk about. I'll watch the episode. But yeah, I understand why black people would talk about it. The thing is, it wasn't a government program. The US government wasn't using slaves. It was individual slave owners. This isn't like the japanese internment camp situation in which the US government locked up japanese americans and so they deserve reparation. The US government sure as hell used slaves?!?. I suppose they left the part about slaves building the capital in that “A Birthday Cake for George Washington” version of history. You have got to stop being so insulting when you post and treating people like idiots or racists. No. That's propagating an unhelpful at best idea it's okay for black people to talk about problems unique to them, but only if they do it in ways that don't make White people uncomfortable. These two articles by Doug Muder do a decent job of elaborating on it. Also try this one. If GreenHorizons is confrontational and gets in people's face about things like correcting misinformation about the US government's usage of slaves or involvement with slave owners (spoiler warning: around 2/3 of the Presidents before Lincoln and the next two Presidents after Lincoln were slave owners), that's probably because it gets results.
No, it is propogating the idea that everyone should be respectful if you want an open and honest discussion of the issues at hand. Fair enough if you are not actually interested in such a discussion, but then what are you doing on a discussion forum?
|
On January 22 2016 09:42 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 09:28 Plansix wrote:On January 22 2016 09:22 Aquanim wrote:If you meaningfully want to combat racism you can't just act like it doesn't exist. That is true to some degree. The argument is that placing racism on a pedestal above other reasons for social/economic inequality is quite likely to incite people to further racism. I am not saying not to acknowledge racism. I am saying that it should not be the only thing acknowledged. If nothing else, from a purely tactical point of view that offers opponents the smallest possible chance to claim that any special privilege is being granted. Everyone agrees there are numerous problems in the US, some as big as racism. There are a lot of problem solvers in the world, we can handle two things at once. The issues with racism can be addressed on their own, without waiting to solutions to those other issues. My concern is that this attitude will not actually result in success. Perhaps I'm wrong, and it is possible to right this particular wrong without reference to the many other problems in society. I certainly hope for the sake of the people trying to go about it in this way that I am wrong. It seems to me, though, that a cooperative lifting effort is more likely to result in success than if everybody is only concerned with their own load. Working to minimise arbitrary disadvantage is likely a far more popular goal than working to minimise arbitrary disadvantage for a particular subset of people.
Its a big world out there, we can handle it. There is no "all solution" to these problems, the world is a complex and nuanced place. And a rising tide lifts all ships.
On January 22 2016 09:47 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 09:25 Kyadytim wrote:On January 22 2016 08:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 22 2016 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2016 08:03 Deathstar wrote:On January 22 2016 07:47 Plansix wrote:On January 22 2016 07:39 Deathstar wrote:
I don't understand what the court case for this would even look like.
Defendant: White people in America
Plaintiff: Black people in America
Is reparations considered a serious claim? That, after 200 years, the modern day descendants of slaves are entitled to tax payer paid compensation? What is the logic? http://www.newsweek.com/slavery-reparations-could-cost-14-trillion-according-new-calculation-364141Its a talking point. If you take the number of slaves and the amount of unpaid labor caused by slavery, the prices is like 14 trillion. Which is a crazy number. But forget talking about it, just watch Season One, episode 18 of the West Wing, Six meetings before Lunch. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0745677/You have a liberal white house staffer talking to black appointee for assistant attorney general for civil rights about reparations and not agreeing on the topic. It pretty much sums up how its not viable or realistic, but a good thing to talk about. I'll watch the episode. But yeah, I understand why black people would talk about it. The thing is, it wasn't a government program. The US government wasn't using slaves. It was individual slave owners. This isn't like the japanese internment camp situation in which the US government locked up japanese americans and so they deserve reparation. The US government sure as hell used slaves?!?. I suppose they left the part about slaves building the capital in that “A Birthday Cake for George Washington” version of history. You have got to stop being so insulting when you post and treating people like idiots or racists. No. That's propagating an unhelpful at best idea it's okay for black people to talk about problems unique to them, but only if they do it in ways that don't make White people uncomfortable. These two articles by Doug Muder do a decent job of elaborating on it. Also try this one. If GreenHorizons is confrontational and gets in people's face about things like correcting misinformation about the US government's usage of slaves or involvement with slave owners (spoiler warning: around 2/3 of the Presidents before Lincoln and the next two Presidents after Lincoln were slave owners), that's probably because it gets results. No, it is propogating the idea that everyone should be respectful if you want an open and honest discussion of the issues at hand. Fair enough if you are not actually interested in such a discussion, but then what are you doing on a discussion forum?
Yes, but a some point you need to put some bite behind your statements if someone insists on being miss informed or just saying shit that is totally wrong. The claim that the government didn't use slave is just dumb and can be solved with a google search.
|
Not sure if it's been posted, but a new CCN-ORC poll shows Sanders + 8 in Iowa. He was -18 last month
Bernie Sanders 51%
Hillary Clinton 43%
2008 caucus-ers support Clinton 55% to Sanders 37%, which paints a bleak picture for him if people don't show up and vote. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. I wouldn't want to be in the war-room for HRC if she loses in Iowa by 4-8 points, and NH by 5-12 points. It'll look embarrassing, even if she rebounds and goes on to the general election
|
On January 22 2016 09:17 Nyxisto wrote:
but to fight racism you can't just 'help everybody in need', you'll need to address racism specifically.
We know pretty well what the formula is to helping communities in need: Consistent education, rehabilitating criminals, providing healthcare (specifically contraception), employing people so there actually are opportunities, weeding out crime, and doing all this through organizing the community.
Discrimination by the police force,
Most people aren't in favor of police brutality, and simple bodycams are already shown to do a great job keeping police accountable. But it's important to remember that police discrimination is also rooted in years of disproportionate representation in crime. The focus should be fighting poverty, a huge factor in crime, and fighting crime itself in ways that don't just feed the prison industry.
under-representation of minorities in certain jobs and so on.
What aspect of this specifically, would you say, is a problem?
If you meaningfully want to combat racism you can't just act like it doesn't exist.
There are people on all sides who personally benefit from continued divisiveness, and furthering that isn't helping anyone either.
|
On January 22 2016 09:50 Plansix wrote:[ Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 09:47 Ghostcom wrote:On January 22 2016 09:25 Kyadytim wrote:On January 22 2016 08:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 22 2016 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2016 08:03 Deathstar wrote:On January 22 2016 07:47 Plansix wrote:On January 22 2016 07:39 Deathstar wrote:
I don't understand what the court case for this would even look like.
Defendant: White people in America
Plaintiff: Black people in America
Is reparations considered a serious claim? That, after 200 years, the modern day descendants of slaves are entitled to tax payer paid compensation? What is the logic? http://www.newsweek.com/slavery-reparations-could-cost-14-trillion-according-new-calculation-364141Its a talking point. If you take the number of slaves and the amount of unpaid labor caused by slavery, the prices is like 14 trillion. Which is a crazy number. But forget talking about it, just watch Season One, episode 18 of the West Wing, Six meetings before Lunch. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0745677/You have a liberal white house staffer talking to black appointee for assistant attorney general for civil rights about reparations and not agreeing on the topic. It pretty much sums up how its not viable or realistic, but a good thing to talk about. I'll watch the episode. But yeah, I understand why black people would talk about it. The thing is, it wasn't a government program. The US government wasn't using slaves. It was individual slave owners. This isn't like the japanese internment camp situation in which the US government locked up japanese americans and so they deserve reparation. The US government sure as hell used slaves?!?. I suppose they left the part about slaves building the capital in that “A Birthday Cake for George Washington” version of history. You have got to stop being so insulting when you post and treating people like idiots or racists. No. That's propagating an unhelpful at best idea it's okay for black people to talk about problems unique to them, but only if they do it in ways that don't make White people uncomfortable. These two articles by Doug Muder do a decent job of elaborating on it. Also try this one. If GreenHorizons is confrontational and gets in people's face about things like correcting misinformation about the US government's usage of slaves or involvement with slave owners (spoiler warning: around 2/3 of the Presidents before Lincoln and the next two Presidents after Lincoln were slave owners), that's probably because it gets results. No, it is propogating the idea that everyone should be respectful if you want an open and honest discussion of the issues at hand. Fair enough if you are not actually interested in such a discussion, but then what are you doing on a discussion forum? Yes, but a some point you need to put some bite behind your statements if someone insists on being miss informed or just saying shit that is totally wrong. The claim that the government didn't use slave is just dumb and can be solved with a google search.
No you don't. You can correct people just fine without calling them raging idiots, racists or otherwise dumb down the discussion. It adds absolutely nothing to your argument and only destroys any chance of having a meaningful debate.
|
On January 22 2016 09:56 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 09:17 Nyxisto wrote:
but to fight racism you can't just 'help everybody in need', you'll need to address racism specifically. We know pretty well what the formula is to helping communities in need: Consistent education, rehabilitating criminals, providing healthcare (specifically contraception), employing people so there actually are opportunities, weeding out crime, and doing all this through organizing the community. Most people aren't in favor of police brutality, and simple bodycams are already shown to do a great job keeping police accountable. But it's important to remember that police discrimination is also rooted in years of disproportionate representation in crime. The focus should be fighting poverty, a huge factor in crime, and fighting crime itself in ways that don't just feed the prison industry. What aspect of this specifically, would you say, is a problem? Show nested quote +If you meaningfully want to combat racism you can't just act like it doesn't exist. There are people on all sides who personally benefit from continued divisiveness, and furthering that isn't helping anyone either.
lack of diversity in the workplace, especially in the higher paying jobs and in public administration means also segregation in the cities and communities. You can't overcome racism if people don't live and work together. Also diversity in companies is linked to better performance so there's also overall economic benefit.
|
GH is a touchy person.
The federal government did, at some point in its history, use slave labor. The only example google shows is the capitol, in which the documentation shows that the government paid the slave owners to rent their slaves. So, strictly speaking, am I wrong? Yes. It's safe to assume that most slaves were working on plantations in private hands. And sometimes, very sporadically, the government would rent their labor. It was not the federal government holding onto slaves and using them (which was what I was getting at).
|
On January 22 2016 10:02 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 09:50 Plansix wrote:[ On January 22 2016 09:47 Ghostcom wrote:On January 22 2016 09:25 Kyadytim wrote:On January 22 2016 08:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 22 2016 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2016 08:03 Deathstar wrote:On January 22 2016 07:47 Plansix wrote:On January 22 2016 07:39 Deathstar wrote:
I don't understand what the court case for this would even look like.
Defendant: White people in America
Plaintiff: Black people in America
Is reparations considered a serious claim? That, after 200 years, the modern day descendants of slaves are entitled to tax payer paid compensation? What is the logic? http://www.newsweek.com/slavery-reparations-could-cost-14-trillion-according-new-calculation-364141Its a talking point. If you take the number of slaves and the amount of unpaid labor caused by slavery, the prices is like 14 trillion. Which is a crazy number. But forget talking about it, just watch Season One, episode 18 of the West Wing, Six meetings before Lunch. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0745677/You have a liberal white house staffer talking to black appointee for assistant attorney general for civil rights about reparations and not agreeing on the topic. It pretty much sums up how its not viable or realistic, but a good thing to talk about. I'll watch the episode. But yeah, I understand why black people would talk about it. The thing is, it wasn't a government program. The US government wasn't using slaves. It was individual slave owners. This isn't like the japanese internment camp situation in which the US government locked up japanese americans and so they deserve reparation. The US government sure as hell used slaves?!?. I suppose they left the part about slaves building the capital in that “A Birthday Cake for George Washington” version of history. You have got to stop being so insulting when you post and treating people like idiots or racists. No. That's propagating an unhelpful at best idea it's okay for black people to talk about problems unique to them, but only if they do it in ways that don't make White people uncomfortable. These two articles by Doug Muder do a decent job of elaborating on it. Also try this one. If GreenHorizons is confrontational and gets in people's face about things like correcting misinformation about the US government's usage of slaves or involvement with slave owners (spoiler warning: around 2/3 of the Presidents before Lincoln and the next two Presidents after Lincoln were slave owners), that's probably because it gets results. No, it is propogating the idea that everyone should be respectful if you want an open and honest discussion of the issues at hand. Fair enough if you are not actually interested in such a discussion, but then what are you doing on a discussion forum? Yes, but a some point you need to put some bite behind your statements if someone insists on being miss informed or just saying shit that is totally wrong. The claim that the government didn't use slave is just dumb and can be solved with a google search. No you don't. You can correct people just fine without calling them raging idiots, racists or otherwise dumb down the discussion. It adds absolutely nothing to your argument and only destroys any chance of having a meaningful debate.
I could, but I am not going to. Not all opinions are created equal. The excessive tolerance of really bad ideas and/or disingenuous arguments not based in reality is not really my thing. If someone is straight up factually incorrect and also throwing a little shade on "black culture", they have exhausted people's tolerance.
On January 22 2016 10:09 Deathstar wrote:
GH is a touchy person.
The federal government did, at some point in its history, use slave (and free) black labor. The only example google shows is the capitol, in which the documentation shows that the government paid the slaves for their labor. So, strictly speaking, am I wrong? Yes. It's safe to assume that most slaves were working on plantations in private hands. And sometimes, very sporadically, the government would rent their labor. It was not the federal government holding onto slaves and using them (which was what I was getting at).
They just made it legal, defended it for decades, created laws to support it and allowed slave ships to dock at the US ports to sell slaves. They created and defended the laws that said blacks had no rights and were 1/5 of a white person.
|
On January 22 2016 10:13 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 10:02 Ghostcom wrote:On January 22 2016 09:50 Plansix wrote:[ On January 22 2016 09:47 Ghostcom wrote:On January 22 2016 09:25 Kyadytim wrote:On January 22 2016 08:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 22 2016 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2016 08:03 Deathstar wrote:On January 22 2016 07:47 Plansix wrote:On January 22 2016 07:39 Deathstar wrote:
I don't understand what the court case for this would even look like.
Defendant: White people in America
Plaintiff: Black people in America
Is reparations considered a serious claim? That, after 200 years, the modern day descendants of slaves are entitled to tax payer paid compensation? What is the logic? http://www.newsweek.com/slavery-reparations-could-cost-14-trillion-according-new-calculation-364141Its a talking point. If you take the number of slaves and the amount of unpaid labor caused by slavery, the prices is like 14 trillion. Which is a crazy number. But forget talking about it, just watch Season One, episode 18 of the West Wing, Six meetings before Lunch. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0745677/You have a liberal white house staffer talking to black appointee for assistant attorney general for civil rights about reparations and not agreeing on the topic. It pretty much sums up how its not viable or realistic, but a good thing to talk about. I'll watch the episode. But yeah, I understand why black people would talk about it. The thing is, it wasn't a government program. The US government wasn't using slaves. It was individual slave owners. This isn't like the japanese internment camp situation in which the US government locked up japanese americans and so they deserve reparation. The US government sure as hell used slaves?!?. I suppose they left the part about slaves building the capital in that “A Birthday Cake for George Washington” version of history. You have got to stop being so insulting when you post and treating people like idiots or racists. No. That's propagating an unhelpful at best idea it's okay for black people to talk about problems unique to them, but only if they do it in ways that don't make White people uncomfortable. These two articles by Doug Muder do a decent job of elaborating on it. Also try this one. If GreenHorizons is confrontational and gets in people's face about things like correcting misinformation about the US government's usage of slaves or involvement with slave owners (spoiler warning: around 2/3 of the Presidents before Lincoln and the next two Presidents after Lincoln were slave owners), that's probably because it gets results. No, it is propogating the idea that everyone should be respectful if you want an open and honest discussion of the issues at hand. Fair enough if you are not actually interested in such a discussion, but then what are you doing on a discussion forum? Yes, but a some point you need to put some bite behind your statements if someone insists on being miss informed or just saying shit that is totally wrong. The claim that the government didn't use slave is just dumb and can be solved with a google search. No you don't. You can correct people just fine without calling them raging idiots, racists or otherwise dumb down the discussion. It adds absolutely nothing to your argument and only destroys any chance of having a meaningful debate. I could, but I am not going to. Not all opinions are created equal. The excessive tolerance of really bad ideas and/or disingenuous arguments not based in reality is not really my thing. If someone is straight up factually incorrect and also throwing a little shade on "black culture", they have exhausted people's tolerance.
Funny how in your mind it is always your opinions that are the right ones...
And God forbid someone is wrong on an internet forum!!
|
On January 22 2016 10:17 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 10:13 Plansix wrote:On January 22 2016 10:02 Ghostcom wrote:On January 22 2016 09:50 Plansix wrote:[ On January 22 2016 09:47 Ghostcom wrote:On January 22 2016 09:25 Kyadytim wrote:On January 22 2016 08:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On January 22 2016 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2016 08:03 Deathstar wrote:On January 22 2016 07:47 Plansix wrote:[quote] http://www.newsweek.com/slavery-reparations-could-cost-14-trillion-according-new-calculation-364141Its a talking point. If you take the number of slaves and the amount of unpaid labor caused by slavery, the prices is like 14 trillion. Which is a crazy number. But forget talking about it, just watch Season One, episode 18 of the West Wing, Six meetings before Lunch. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0745677/You have a liberal white house staffer talking to black appointee for assistant attorney general for civil rights about reparations and not agreeing on the topic. It pretty much sums up how its not viable or realistic, but a good thing to talk about. I'll watch the episode. But yeah, I understand why black people would talk about it. The thing is, it wasn't a government program. The US government wasn't using slaves. It was individual slave owners. This isn't like the japanese internment camp situation in which the US government locked up japanese americans and so they deserve reparation. The US government sure as hell used slaves?!?. I suppose they left the part about slaves building the capital in that “A Birthday Cake for George Washington” version of history. You have got to stop being so insulting when you post and treating people like idiots or racists. No. That's propagating an unhelpful at best idea it's okay for black people to talk about problems unique to them, but only if they do it in ways that don't make White people uncomfortable. These two articles by Doug Muder do a decent job of elaborating on it. Also try this one. If GreenHorizons is confrontational and gets in people's face about things like correcting misinformation about the US government's usage of slaves or involvement with slave owners (spoiler warning: around 2/3 of the Presidents before Lincoln and the next two Presidents after Lincoln were slave owners), that's probably because it gets results. No, it is propogating the idea that everyone should be respectful if you want an open and honest discussion of the issues at hand. Fair enough if you are not actually interested in such a discussion, but then what are you doing on a discussion forum? Yes, but a some point you need to put some bite behind your statements if someone insists on being miss informed or just saying shit that is totally wrong. The claim that the government didn't use slave is just dumb and can be solved with a google search. No you don't. You can correct people just fine without calling them raging idiots, racists or otherwise dumb down the discussion. It adds absolutely nothing to your argument and only destroys any chance of having a meaningful debate. I could, but I am not going to. Not all opinions are created equal. The excessive tolerance of really bad ideas and/or disingenuous arguments not based in reality is not really my thing. If someone is straight up factually incorrect and also throwing a little shade on "black culture", they have exhausted people's tolerance. Funny how in your mind it is always your opinions that are the right ones... And God forbid someone is wrong on an internet forum!!
At no point did I say that this didn't apply to me. I don't need every discussion to be the height of civility and politeness.
|
On January 22 2016 10:09 Deathstar wrote:
GH is a touchy person.
The federal government did, at some point in its history, use slave labor. The only example google shows is the capitol, in which the documentation shows that the government paid the slaves for their labor. So, strictly speaking, am I wrong? Yes. It's safe to assume that most slaves were working on plantations in private hands. And sometimes, very sporadically, the government would rent their labor. It was not the federal government holding onto slaves and using them (which was what I was getting at).
"documentation shows that the government paid the slaves for their labor"... Really...?
At some point ignorance and opinion become so obscene, it's ridicule is not excessive, but necessary.
|
On January 22 2016 10:09 Deathstar wrote:
GH is a touchy person.
The federal government did, at some point in its history, use slave (and free) black labor. The only example google shows is the capitol, in which the documentation shows that the government paid the slaves for their labor. So, strictly speaking, am I wrong? Yes. It's safe to assume that most slaves were working on plantations in private hands. And sometimes, very sporadically, the government would rent their labor. It was not the federal government holding onto slaves and using them (which was what I was getting at).
Going back to the actual point you were trying to make, though, that's not an especially good argument that the government was not responsible for slavery. They made up an essential part of the system which made it possible.
The link between the government and slavery is indeed less tangible than its link to the Japanese internment camps. There's also the issue of the degree of culpability of today's government for the actions of one that long ago, whereas in the internment camps case the culpability was far more obvious. Nevertheless it is not as though there should be no responsibility taken.
On January 22 2016 10:13 Plansix wrote:
...
I could, but I am not going to. Not all opinions are created equal. The excessive tolerance of really bad ideas and/or disingenuous arguments not based in reality is not really my thing. If someone is straight up factually incorrect and also throwing a little shade on "black culture", they have exhausted people's tolerance.
...
If you're prepared to accept the price of being disrespectful (namely that they will tend to show less respect towards you) for the sake of blowing off steam, that's your business.
Of course, perhaps you don't care about their respect. Again, that and its consequences for a fruitful discourse with them are your business.
Just remember there's a difference between making somebody else uncomfortable with you expressing your opinion because you had a good point, as opposed to because you abused them.
|
On January 22 2016 10:02 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 09:56 oBlade wrote:On January 22 2016 09:17 Nyxisto wrote:
but to fight racism you can't just 'help everybody in need', you'll need to address racism specifically. We know pretty well what the formula is to helping communities in need: Consistent education, rehabilitating criminals, providing healthcare (specifically contraception), employing people so there actually are opportunities, weeding out crime, and doing all this through organizing the community. Discrimination by the police force, Most people aren't in favor of police brutality, and simple bodycams are already shown to do a great job keeping police accountable. But it's important to remember that police discrimination is also rooted in years of disproportionate representation in crime. The focus should be fighting poverty, a huge factor in crime, and fighting crime itself in ways that don't just feed the prison industry. under-representation of minorities in certain jobs and so on. What aspect of this specifically, would you say, is a problem? If you meaningfully want to combat racism you can't just act like it doesn't exist. There are people on all sides who personally benefit from continued divisiveness, and furthering that isn't helping anyone either. lack of diversity in the workplace, especially in the higher paying jobs and in public administration means also segregation in the cities and communities. You can't overcome racism if people don't live and work together. Also diversity in companies is linked to better performance so there's also overall economic benefit.
I think you have the cause and effect reversed.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
|
On January 22 2016 10:22 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 10:09 Deathstar wrote:
GH is a touchy person.
The federal government did, at some point in its history, use slave labor. The only example google shows is the capitol, in which the documentation shows that the government paid the slaves for their labor. So, strictly speaking, am I wrong? Yes. It's safe to assume that most slaves were working on plantations in private hands. And sometimes, very sporadically, the government would rent their labor. It was not the federal government holding onto slaves and using them (which was what I was getting at).
"documentation shows that the government paid the slaves for their labor"... Really...? At some point ignorance and opinion become so obscene, it's ridicule is not excessive, but necessary.
Payment to slave owners. My bad.
But the task force did find plenty of evidence of slave involvement in the Capitol's construction. Perhaps the most compelling evidence were records of payments from the commissioners for the District of Columbia — the three men appointed by George Washington to oversee the construction of the Capitol and the rest of the city of Washington — to slave owners for the rental of slaves to work on the Capitol. The records reflect 385 payments between 1795 and 1801 for "Negro hire," a euphemism for the yearly rental of slaves.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jan/19/nancy-pelosi/legend-slaves-building-capitol-correct/
|
To wrap up my point before the derail, the case for reparations (who will get payment, who will the sum be derived from, what is the sum, etc.) has flaws because it's not a matter of government to people, but people to people.
However, Aquanim, I agree with you. The government should issue an apology for letting the practice of slavery continue for so long.
|
On January 22 2016 10:23 Aquanim wrote:
If you're prepared to accept the price of being disrespectful (namely that they will tend to show less respect towards you) for the sake of blowing off steam, that's your business.
Of course, perhaps you don't care about their respect. Again, that and its consequences for a fruitful discourse with them are your business.
Just remember there's a difference between making somebody else uncomfortable with you expressing your opinion because you had a good point, as opposed to because you abused them.
I care about their respect slightly more than random people walking down the street. Most of the people in this thread have been posting here for over a year or more. We are all pretty used to each other. I have no problem voicing my opinion of people who believe very stupid things. We have a Truther who posts here every once and a while about how 9/11 is an inside job and how Trump is going take america back for white people. You don't have a lot of rational, reasonable arguments with people like that.
And tbh, GH's response was really tame. Feelings were only slightly bruised.
Edit: The government has issued that apology. We are past that now. There are other issues to address, like diversity and the failing justice system.
|
I'm fairly sure there's a mod note with rules in the OP about not being dicks, yeah?
Lets give that a shot. Everyone just take a deep breath and shit.
|
On January 22 2016 10:27 Deathstar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2016 10:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 22 2016 10:09 Deathstar wrote:
GH is a touchy person.
The federal government did, at some point in its history, use slave labor. The only example google shows is the capitol, in which the documentation shows that the government paid the slaves for their labor. So, strictly speaking, am I wrong? Yes. It's safe to assume that most slaves were working on plantations in private hands. And sometimes, very sporadically, the government would rent their labor. It was not the federal government holding onto slaves and using them (which was what I was getting at).
"documentation shows that the government paid the slaves for their labor"... Really...? At some point ignorance and opinion become so obscene, it's ridicule is not excessive, but necessary. Payment to slave owners. My bad. Show nested quote +But the task force did find plenty of evidence of slave involvement in the Capitol's construction. Perhaps the most compelling evidence were records of payments from the commissioners for the District of Columbia — the three men appointed by George Washington to oversee the construction of the Capitol and the rest of the city of Washington — to slave owners for the rental of slaves to work on the Capitol. The records reflect 385 payments between 1795 and 1801 for "Negro hire," a euphemism for the yearly rental of slaves. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jan/19/nancy-pelosi/legend-slaves-building-capitol-correct/
Think about for a moment how distorted your perception of slavery has to be that you actually thought that slaves got paid to do work, and you managed to make a post about it without it ever triggering in your brain that slaves are slaves in part because they don't get paid (among other things).
They were property according to the US government. If the US government called black people "people" slavery would of been the greatest crime in US history. The US government has more than enough culpability regarding the institution of slavery.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
