Hot Air Covers Reparations
…and crackerdom ensues.
I’m not entirely sure what possessed A la Pundit to cover this, considering the rabid racism of his base audience.
And he doth proclaimeth (with a healthy dose of ye olde verbal irony):
It’ll cure blacks’ sense of grievance and make whites more sympathetic to the injustice of slavery by driving home the economic costs.
I don’t believe the author of this sentence has the capacity to sympathize with the man who couldn’t patronize a store owned and operated by a person who looks like him if he so desired. Granting small bits of humanity such as this to a people oppressed for the good part of 500 years is beyond a dollar amount. Who cares how angry a bunch of racists get?
The comments to this post (all typos theirs) are the best part. It’s really no wonder why Michelle doesn’t allow comments on her site, and it ain’t because of the liberals.
I’ll begin by setting the stage with a quote from El-Hajj Malik El-Shabbazz (a.k.a. Malcolm X) on the issue of reparations. It really addresses most of the “arguments” present in the linked thread:
If you are the son of a man who had a wealthy estate and you inherit your father’s estate, you have to pay off the debts that your father incurred before he died. The only reason that the present generation of white Americans are in a position of economic strength…is because their fathers worked our fathers for over 400 years with no pay…We were sold from plantation to plantation like you sell a horse, or a cow, or a chicken, or a bushel of wheat…All that money…is what gives the present generation of American whites the ability to walk around the earth with their chest out…like they have some kind of economic ingenuity. Your father isn’t here to pay. My father isn’t here to collect. But I’m here to collect and you’re here to pay.
[Before proceeding: Q: Does anyone else find it odd that permalinks aren’t available for individual comments? I’m sure it has something as simple as a software incompatibility.]
Um, so do us decendants of Polish immigrants who never owned slaves have to participate in this? My family’s American roots only go back 4 generations and I just want to be clear on who has to pay or not…
DakRoland on July 10, 2006 at 4:55 PM
That’s funny, DakRoland, because the descendants of slaves have no idea where their families came from. I’d bet that most have no idea who owned their ancestors, much less from which African tribes they belonged to. And there’s also that technicality of whites forcing said Africans to convert to Christianity and subsequently raping the females so as to deny blacks any sense of heritage.
And because we all pay taxes according to how much each of us has exploited the system that was built on the backs of slaves, yes, even the offspring of recent Polish immigrants owe something in the form of reparations.
Any descendants of Union Army members should in turn receive compensation from compenstaed blacks for freeing them and the untold hardships they and their families went through.
Also, any compensated blacks will no longer be eligible for any special “minority” treatment such as affirmative action, quotas, ect.
darwin on July 10, 2006 at 5:11 PM
Dear darwin the cracker: Show me where freed slaves forced Union veterans onto rickety ships in chains and then forced them to plant and harvest rice for a dozen generations, and you might have a point.
If I as a black man walked up to a white proponent of reparations and slapped the **** out of him would I be wrong?
Theworldisnotenough on July 10, 2006 at 5:56 PM
Yes, you would be wrong. And you’d also be an Uncle Tom.
Speaking of Uncle Toms, the article that sparked the Hot Air post cites a black critic of reparations, one John H. McWhorter. Prometheus 6 dug up one of his old posts here in which McWhorter incorrectly places blame on blacks for violence at the hands of New Jersey State Troopers. Classy.
Also, many of the commenters venture towards the issue of reparations for Native Americans because of the atrocities committed by Europeans here in North America. Of course, they are using this in an attempt illustrate the intractability of granting reparations, but it’s territory that deserves real reflection.
Putting it mildly, whites have really done a doozy on the non-white world, and the zeitgeist of modern white society, primarily in “Old Europe”, has transformed over the last few decades from something breeding insufferable intolerance to something that could motivate true reconciliation. As is expected from a country unnecessarily clutching onto its flawed religious traditions, the U.S. is way behind on this. But with enough international pressure and a new force of organization in Afro-American communities, reparations could easily be on the horizon.
I’d also add that if it is shown that reparations would lead to a further decline in white population growth, I would make it a personal goal to see it come to pass in my lifetime.
Imagine the true debate that would ensue if this was taken seriously by those effected most. The elite ruling class, the 2.5% of our population and their ancestors & progeny. They took the most, enjoyed the most, banged the females the most (in most cases) and now have to pay back the most.
Hence the passive aggressive underlying resistance by the rich elite to avoid this at all cost. Hell, I would throw in my share. I am paternal third generation Irish and sixth generation maternal British. While considering a payment plan I realized my share would be minuscule comparatively. My ancestors were all poor Yankees.
Comment by Jimmy — July 11, 2006 @ 5:57 pm
Hey there. I’m a pretty typical Bay Area liberal, but I grew up in a very white, very conservative town in Washington state. My family’s been in this country since the seventeenth century — first as poor laborers in the Northeast, then as pioneers after fighting for the Union in the Civil War. I’m fully aware that my ancestors settled on land that once belonged to Native Americans, and that they no doubt benefited (however indirectly) from the oppression of slaves; I also know that my great-great grandparents were fiercely anti-slavery, and that my pioneering forebears were unusually sympathetic toward the plight of Native Americans. They weren’t perfect people, but they did make an attempt (within their means) to be decent people, and I’m proud of that.
The debate over “reparations” seems to me a particularly thorny one: I can understand the arguments for both sides, and I can certainly see the good intentions of those who support it. But I do not see the benefit of calling people “racist” just because they’re not quite sure why they owe money for the sins of previous generations — money that I certainly don’t have, and money that my dirt-poor forebears never had either. The history of power relations in this country is awfully complicated, and it strikes me as naive to argue that all white people have always been at the top of the power chain, and therefore all white people have a debt to pay. Race relations in America have never been entirely independent from class relations; even now, the real evils in this country arise from a small group of elite conservatives who are maintaining a Christianist stranglehold over middle- and lower-class citizens of all races. Saddling the poor whites of America with the debt of previous generations would be letting off the present-day elite far too easily: the persistence of racial inequality in America is of course the result of a long accumulation of injustices, but the injustices continue in part because neo-conservatives, in all their smug complacency, believe in the divinely ordained superiority and entitlement that comes with American Christianist capitalism. These people are the real enemies of history, of equality, of America. Apologizing for past mistakes, while always honorable, is not the same as preventing future ones; reparations would do nothing to change the structure of power relations in America, and at best would allow the present generation of elitist bastards to continue amassing money and power with a clear historical conscience.
Comment by rasselas — July 13, 2006 @ 5:29 pm
I call them “racists” because I believe that is what they are. It’s also an effort to shame them into reconsidering their positions.
I’d just like to point out that throughout our history, blacks weren’t lynched because they were poor. They were lynched because they were black. That simple fact is enough for me to be convinced that whites (poor or rich) owe something to all blacks of this nation.
And no one should fool themselves into thinking poor whites would shoulder the burden here. It is the rich (mostly) whites who will see dramatic increases in their taxes to pay for a reparations regime.
Comment by Ryan — July 14, 2006 @ 8:01 am
Yes, because we all know how bad the super-rich are at avoiding taxes they don’t want to pay.
Comment by Katter — July 14, 2006 @ 3:36 pm
I don’t pretend to play a public policy wonk — even on the Prestigious Internet — but I think one possibility would be to temporarily lift the cap on payroll taxes and have a section of (or something resembling) the SSA implement the reparations program.
Unfortunately, it would all be something for politicians to hammer out.
Comment by Ryan — July 14, 2006 @ 4:08 pm
Right you are — blacks were obviously lynched for being black, not for being poor. But as a gay American, should I demand reparations from straight people for pistol-whipping Matthew Shepard to death? After all, since a few straighties are responsible, then all straighties must be responsible. When do reparations stop? And who gets to decide which past injustices deserve reparations, and which injustices merely deserve meek apologies?
You’re perfectly right in pointing out that the outrageous cruelty of the slave ships, etc., means that (with the possible exception of Native Americans) no minority in this country has been subjected to as much relentless and pernicious racism as African-Americans. But blacks are by no means the only minority to experience profound injustice at the hands of a powerful elite. So why play this game of “my historical injustices were worse than your historical injustices”? Do you honestly believe that obsessing over the mistakes of past generations — and quantifying those mistakes according to some obscure calculus of guilt — is the most constructive and practical way to actually confront the inequalities of the present? Or is it just easier to point your finger at dead people, because the present situation is too complex to fix?
I guess you think that I’m a racist, or at least you’re calling me that “in an effort to shame me into reconsidering my position.” Just so you know, this is an “ad hominem” argument — an argument that attacks the person rather than his or her logic. Ad hominem arguments are patently invalid, and are generally the resort of those for whom the resources of valid, logical rhetoric have failed. I understand that my own position may or may not be valid, but I am not “ashamed” of what I sincerely believe; if anyone should feel shame, it’s you, for pulling out the “racism” charge as a rhetorical feint against those who might reasonably disagree with you (which isn’t so different from a neo-conservative pulling out the “traitor” card whenever someone questions his or her politics). If people fail to speak their minds to you just because they’re afraid of being called racists, then you haven’t won any argument; you’ve only succeeded in shutting down discussion. So do us all a favor — leave that shameful tactic to the neo-cons.
Comment by rasselas — July 14, 2006 @ 4:10 pm
I am referring to opponents of reparations as racists, but only because their position and arguments for holding that position are bigoted. Those racists I quoted in the original post are not arguing, for instance, that the country cannot afford to pay reparations or that it is, in and of itself, an intractable task. They are arguing that blacks only deserve reparations, if white society is somehow spared any burden in the process.
This misses the whole point. And the argument itself is racist. It’s merely incidental that this makes them racists. Therefore, this cannot be classified as an ad hominem argument.
You’re right. But based on all of the facts I’ve absorbed on the subject, I wholeheartedly believe that blacks in this country have been on the receiving end of the greatest injustices that the western world has to offer, far worse than any other minority group. And for there to have been such slight attempts to rectify this is shameful.
As for “reasonable disagreement”, I would accept it. I have yet to see it, though. Why exactly are you against reparations? I didn’t see any explicit reasons in either of your comments here. Could you define criteria for a group to receive reparations, and then explain why you don’t believe blacks have suffered enough to meet that?
Comment by Ryan — July 14, 2006 @ 4:28 pm
Let me repeat: We can sit around and attempt to quantify past injustices, but I just don’t think that’s a constructive way of addressing the very real concerns of the present. I think we could assert, if we wanted to, that any number of minorities meet some kind of “criteria for a group to receive reparations.” The task of determining who deserves reparations would be impossibly subjective and, if extended to all oppressed groups, absolutely neverending; if African-Americans happen to have suffered more than other minorities, does that mean that the travails of Native Americans et al. are utterly unworthy of compensation? It seems to me that “reparations money” could be better allocated to our schools — specifically, to our history classes — so that young Americans could learn more about their history instead of receiving a check for it. As for the rich shouldering the tax burden, I’m afraid that under the current administration only the poor would suffer from the inevitable discontinuation of social services that would result from the allocation of reparations money. Do the rich *ever* really bear the brunt of any tax burden?
Your stated reason for calling anti-reparations folks “racist” is most certainly ad hominem. You say that you’re trying to “shame them.” If the “racist” charge were actually being used to build your argument, then it would be valid, but instead you’re using it as a sweeping dismissal without a rational explanation. The whole point of the ad hominem fallacy is that it conflates the person with his or her argument, which is absolutely what you’re doing. Rather than conduct a reasonable and logically valid discussion, you’ve simply transformed a rather subjective value judgment into a personal attack.
Comment by rasselas — July 14, 2006 @ 5:34 pm
I am trying to shame them, but that isn’t the only reason I’m calling them what they are. Comment 3 above began: “I call them “racists” because I believe that is what they are. It’s also an effort to shame them into reconsidering their positions.” I probably shouldn’t have made such an irresponsible statement; I’m calling them racists, because I believe I’ve shown them to be that — not to invalidate their arguments.
Show me where I have been unclear in my argument that the position against reparations is not racist. I am holding that a debt is owed by the government of the U.S. to blacks in America. Those who are against it are denying that sense of justice to that group [because of their race] for whatever reason.
I am willing to hold a “logically valid discussion” with a racist, so long as that individual understands that this is the position they hold. It seems that the impasse the two of us have approached is that you disagree with me on how bad the blacks of this country still have it because of the exploitation and discrimination of the previous five centuries. The denial of that history is systemic in white society, and I believe strongly that it is racist in nature.
Comment by Ryan — July 14, 2006 @ 5:53 pm
An example of an ad hominem argument:
Not an example of an ad hominem argument:
Comment by Ryan — July 14, 2006 @ 11:41 pm
Suppose we pay blacks for the sins of people that none of us reading this ever met, does that end racisim. What will happen to the next generation of, as many would say, the rich white that has to pay for this, will this help or hurt racism.
Now…. if you wanted to trace the ancestory of the slave owners and by threat of force & violence take their money I’m cool with that.
But please don’t punish me for someone else’s mistakes.
Comment by Dave — July 22, 2006 @ 9:10 pm
This might be little offtopic, but i am hosting my site on hostgator and they will suspend my hosting in 4days, so i would like to ask you which hosting do you use recommend?zhongchengmaoyi110post
Comment by nfl jerseys for cheap — October 22, 2011 @ 3:41 am
No one can succeed without any hard work. Karl Max was successful, because he spent more than 30 years writing the book “Communist Manifesto”; Tomas Edison
succeeded, because he had experimented thousands of times to find the best material for lights. Every success calls for hard work. If you want to suc-ceed, work hard
first.zhongchengmaoyi110post
Comment by Moncler Jackets — October 22, 2011 @ 3:43 am
Another defendant was seen shoveling heavy snow and walking with a baby stroller for 40 minutes, the north face clearance a disability claim in which she claimed to be unable to stand for more than five minutes without leg pain. She is paid at least $108,000 a year by the railroad authority, prosecutors said.
Comment by north face clearance — October 31, 2011 @ 2:04 am
Whether McGrady ends up with the Bulls, it still doesn’t get them much closer to the ultimate goal of winning a championship. The Bulls need a dynamic two-guard who can take some pressure off Derrick Rose, create his own shot and play solid defense.
Comment by Basketball jerseys — November 24, 2011 @ 9:55 pm
Please remember that vintage watches have survived for many decades by being treated Romance God created the brand since 1988, the company, registered in 102 countries around the world omega seamaster ladies watches,jewelry brand,merchandise exports to 70 countries, is a specialized manufacturer of watches and jewelry. Romance of God in 1998 to become a global brand,hire famous Swiss designer Wolfgang Jonsson program development of brand identity company logos,uniform color. Romance God omega seamaster quartz watches Korea Co., Ltd. has become the leading companies in the industry, the reputation is well known South Korean brand abroad. God watches Co.Ltd. has always been committed to technological innovation and excellence in quality romantic and fashion capture,fashion jewelry has become a world dedicated to business goals and tireless efforts.
Comment by rolex lady — June 4, 2012 @ 3:27 am
As usual this was a thoughtful submit today. You make me want to preserve coming back and forwarding it my followers?-.
Comment by Coach Factory — June 6, 2012 @ 6:17 pm
I found your blog site on google and check several of the early posts. Continue to keep up the good work. I just added up your RSS feed to my MSN News Reader. Looking forward to reading through far more from you later on!
Comment by Gucci Outlet — July 23, 2012 @ 7:51 am
Curious to determine what all you intellectuals need to say about this?-?-.
Comment by Coach Outlet — August 6, 2012 @ 1:03 pm
This can be a great website write-up and I defer to you what you’ve said below. I’ve previously subscribed for a RSS feed in Firefox and are going to be your regular reader. Many thanks for the time in writing the submit.
Comment by Discount Coach Handbags — September 6, 2012 @ 8:20 am
Hi, thank you so a great deal for these ideas!
Comment by Louis Vuitton Outlet — October 13, 2012 @ 5:37 am
De style classique et sobre qui s’appuient sur des couleurs neutres et des dessins aux styles yeux popping vraiment innovant et qui présentent les dernières tendances pour l’horlogerie, vous êtes sûr de trouver ce qu’il vous faut pour tous vos événements importants.
Comment by Hollister France — October 24, 2012 @ 4:31 am
La parte di progettazione di questo sito è molto bello e proprio per questo, l’interfaccia di questo blog diventa facile da usare. Ma c’è un problema che è che non c’è nessun articolo particolare o una descrizione sul posto il blog è fornito.
Comment by Abercrombie — November 7, 2012 @ 9:10 pm