Slavery reparations?

[cheeseburger]

Where do you draw the line?
Should the Jews and Muslims be recompensed by Spain for the Spanish Inquisition?

Why not? It wouldn't be a bad thing.

Should Christians be recompensed by Turkey for the actions of the Ottomans? Europeans by the Scandinavian countries, for the ravages of the Vikings?

Yes, and then maybe. If you can find a viking to do the reparations, go ahead. Vikings dont really exist anymore. So in that sense, the 'line' would be drawn if the offended group, or the offending group, still exists.

Everyone has history and most histories, somewhere, sometime, involve being the oppressor and being oppressed. We need to learn the lessons of the past, look to stopping oppression in the present, and stop fretting about "getting even."

Its not about getting even. If it was, people would be pushing for native americans to re-conquer new york, for example. No ones asking for that.

Would you agree that, at the very least, african american slaves deserve an apology from the U.S. government?

Monetary reparations are tricky because you cant just give people money. That accomplishes nothing. And, you can't pay a one-time sum of X dollars and expect that to be sufficient, because that would be the same as putting a price on another persons life. You can't repay some things.

So, why not devote some millions of dollars anually to supporting underpriveleged children? That and an apology would seem to be ample reparation and evidence that the government truly regrets what happened in the past, and is doing all it can to correct the mistake.

[Warbaby1943]

.

So, why not devote some millions of dollars anually to supporting underpriveleged children? That and an apology would seem to be ample reparation and evidence that the government truly regrets what happened in the past, and is doing all it can to correct the mistake.

Didn't the Civil War show the Government's feelings toward slavery? Many gave their lives to free the slaves. Were their families made whole by any form of compensation?

[cheeseburger]

Didn't the Civil War show the Government's feelings toward slavery? Many gave their lives to free the slaves.

Thats only one side of the issue. Many soldiers died to keep slavery. Thats sending mixed messages at its best.

The vikings were around some 1000 years ago. Whatever they did does not directly influence anything specific in the present. There is no point arguing who did what first and why. Just look at whats going on right now. I mean this in a very broad sense.

Contrast that with, for example, slavery in America. That would account for the reason there are significant numbers of black people (in America), and for plenty of other things. I would even go so far as to argue that is one reason the black prison population is so high (if you dont believe me, read this: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0881455.html)

Dawg, you know I'm not talking about the illegal slave trade happening right now.

And on the subject of the spanish inquisition, the church has actually apologized for many of the atrocities it commited. I think its about time the other major religions apologized for any acts of violence commited in their names. To me, thats good enough, because like I said before, dealing with money is tricky.

And on the subject of reparations, does anyone here think its possible to 'repay' the murder of a human being? No amount of money, jail time, or executions can bring him/her back. Yet no one seems to mind the fact that we still prosecute and seek to punish the criminal, despite the fact that it will not 'balance the account sheets'. So why the double standard?

[Ozme52]

The vikings were around some 1000 years ago. Whatever they did does not directly influence anything specific in the present.

Only all of Great Britain, especially those of Anglo and Saxon descent. It's all ruled by the descendents of the original Normans led by William the Conqueror. The Gauls, who were displaced first from the areas now called Normandy and later from the areas now called Brittainy. The original owners of Malta, Many inhabitants of cities far up the Seine, the Rhine, and the Danube. Many inhabitants of western Russia... just to name a few...

All directly impacted by Scandinavians (nee Vikings.)

But that's not the point is it... Your next point is far more cogent.

There is no point arguing who did what first and why.

You dismiss our examples as being too old and proclaim your own examples as being current.

Just look at whats going on right now. I mean this in a very broad sense.

But they're not current and no more or less valid than any of the other examples. You just don't choose to see it that way. But you have basically agreed with those of us who are against slavery-reparations, because we are making the same arguement. The "offenses" are not current.

Contrast that with, for example, slavery in America. That would account for the reason there are significant numbers of black people (in America), and for plenty of other things. I would even go so far as to argue that is one reason the black prison population is so high (if you dont believe me, read this: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0881455.html)

I don't agree at all. This country is full of very large numbers of many ethnic groups who have, at different times, immigrated, assimilated, and integrated themselves into the "American" way of life. Are you saying that somehow blacks wouldn't be here EXCEPT for slavery? I would argue that if, instead of slavery, the plantation owners had offered wages to work the fields, and conduits had been made available to legally tap the labor pools of Africa, we'd have approximately the same numbers of the same ethnic groups in the country as today. Maybe even more black Americans. They might have come in even greater numbers, say to help build the transcontinental railroads.

And on the subject of the spanish inquisition, the church has actually apologized for many of the atrocities it commited. I think its about time the other major religions apologized for any acts of violence commited in their names. To me, thats good enough, because like I said before, dealing with money is tricky.

That's off topic. If you want to talk about the politics of religious persecution and who should apologize to whom, start a separate thread.

And on the subject of reparations, does anyone here think its possible to 'repay' the murder of a human being? No amount of money, jail time, or executions can bring him/her back.

Gee... I think you're arguing our point now.......

Yet no one seems to mind the fact that we still prosecute and seek to punish the criminal, despite the fact that it will not 'balance the account sheets'. So why the double standard?

Also a different topic.