Slavery reparations gaining momentum

TheDude

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
May 17, 2005
Messages
4,124
Reaction score
747
Location
Santa Rosa, Ca
By ERIN TEXEIRA, AP National Writer
Sun Jul 9, 7:29 PM ET

Advocates who say black Americans should be compensated for slavery and its Jim Crow aftermath are quietly chalking up victories and gaining momentum.

Fueled by the work of scholars and lawyers, their campaign has morphed in recent years from a fringe-group rallying cry into sophisticated, mainstream movement. Most recently, a pair of churches apologized for their part in the slave trade, and one is studying ways to repay black church members.

The overall issue is hardly settled, even among black Americans: Some say that focusing on slavery shouldn't be a top priority or that it doesn't make sense to compensate people generations after a historical wrong.

Yet reparations efforts have led a number of cities and states to approve measures that force businesses to publicize their historical ties to slavery. Several reparations court cases are in progress, and international human rights officials are increasingly spotlighting the issue.

"This matter is growing in significance rather than declining," said Charles Ogletree, a Harvard law professor and a leading reparations activist. "It has more vigor and vitality in the 21st century than it's had in the history of the reparations movement."

The most recent victories for reparations advocates came in June, when the Moravian Church and the Episcopal Church both apologized for owning slaves and promised to battle current racism. The Episcopalians also launched a national, yearslong probe into church slavery links and into whether the church should compensate black members. A white church member, Katrina Browne, also screened a documentary focusing on white culpability at the denomination's national assembly.

The Episcopalians debated slavery and reparations for years before reaching an agreement, said Jayne Oasin, social justice officer for the denomination, who will oversee its work on the issue.

Historically, slavery was an uncomfortable topic for the church. Some Episcopal bishops owned slaves — and the Bible was used to justify the practice, Oasin said.

"Why not (take these steps) 100 years ago?" she said. "Let's talk about the complicity of the Episcopal Church as one of the institutions of this country who, of course, benefited from slavery."

Also in June, a North Carolina commission urged the state government to repay the descendants of victims of a violent 1898 campaign by white supremacists to strip blacks of power in Wilmington, N.C. As many as 60 blacks died, and thousands were driven from the city.

The commission also recommended state-funded programs to support local black businesses and home ownership.

The report came weeks after the Organization of American States requested information from the U.S. government about a 1921 race riot in Tulsa, Okla., in which 1,200 homes were burned and as many as 300 blacks killed. An OAS official said the group might pursue the issue as a violation of international human rights.

The modern reparations movement revived an idea that's been around since emancipation, when black leaders argued that newly freed slaves deserved compensation.

About six years ago, the issue started gaining momentum again. Randall Robinson's "The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks," was a best seller; reparations became a central issue at the World Conference on Racism in Durban, South Africa; and California legislators passed the nation's first law forcing insurance companies that do business with the state to disclose their slavery ties. Illinois passed a similar insurance law in 2003, and the next year Iowa legislators began requesting — but not forcing — the same disclosures.

Several cities — including Chicago, Detroit and Oakland — have laws requiring that all businesses make such disclosures.

Reparations opponents insist that no living American should have to pay for a practice that ended more than 140 years ago. Plus, programs such as affirmative action and welfare already have compensated for past injustices, said John H. McWhorter, a senior fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute.

"The reparations movement is based on a fallacy that cripples the thinking on race — the fallacy that what ails black America is a cash problem," said McWhorter, who is black. "Giving people money will not solve the problems that we have."

Even so, support is reaching beyond African-Americans and the South.

Katrina Browne, the white Episcopalian filmmaker, is finishing a documentary about her ancestors, the DeWolfs of Bristol, R.I., the biggest slave-trading family in U.S. history. She screened it for Episcopal Church officials at the June convention.

"Traces of the Trade: A Story From the Deep North," details how the economies of the Northeast and the nation as a whole depended on slaves.

"A lot of white people think they know everything there is to know about slavery — we all agree it was wrong and that's enough," Browne said. "But this was the foundation of our country, not some Southern anomaly. We all inherit responsibility."

She says neither whites nor blacks will heal from slavery until formal hearings expose the full history of slavery and its effects — an effort similar to South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission after apartheid collapsed.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060709/ap_on_re_us/slavery_reparations

.........................................................................................................

I think it's a bad idea and would only cause more problems. As far as I know; no one alive today neither owned a slave or has been subjected to slavery and the millions of people that died to abolish slavery in America should constitute for something.

What are your thoughts?
 
Absolute madness.

It should never happen. And if it succeeds it will harm the black community more than any other thing in modern history.

Furthermore, America paid for it's sin with blood during the civil war.
 
Agreed, many slave traders bought the slaves from African tribes. Africa should send reparations to all of the African Americans for their role in tribal warfare and enslaving the losing tribes. Why does the US have to take the blame for everything? Oh, yeah b/c we have the $$, not African nations. Plus, why just stop at African Americans - Holocaust victims could bankrupt Germany and every German corporation. I didn't ask to be born to parents with no money, I need reparations also at least forgive my college debt. I also have really curly hair (not trying to stereo-type) so maybe I have some African American blood from my great-great-grandparents or something.
I also married a Puerto Rican whose ancestoral family members left the Middle East due to the strife going on there, the trillionaire sheiks owe her at least one oil well.......

"She says neither whites nor blacks will heal from slavery until formal hearings expose the full history of slavery and its effects — an effort similar to South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission after apartheid collapsed."

Once the full history of slavery is exposed, the finger will be pointed at Africa for their role and people will have to go there and take their grain and rice for reparations.

This is very ridiculous and completely unrelatable to apartheid in South Africa.
 
Reparations, if any, should take the form of the federal government rebuilding black neighborhoods, including schools and implementing carefully crafted programs to create black owned business. While it’s up to each individual to succeed or fail, especially when government has already done much to protect minorities and provide opportunities for success, the fact remains that there are much better things that could be done with the billions of dollars wasted on pork-barrel projects. If the federal government has two billion dollars to waste on projects such as the Super Collider Laboratory, which will likely never be completed then it has enough money to build free homes and schools. It is a disgrace for billions of dollars to be wasted on obscene projects and to give billions away in foreign aid, while at the same time, ignore the poverty that exists in our own country.
 
If reparations are to be paid perhaps it should be done by the UN as the

US was but one of the countries involved slavery and the slave trade with

Africa.

The majority of slaves transported from slavery in Africa to slavery in the

Americas went not to the US, but to Carribean plantations and South

American countries such as Brazil which were Spanish and Portuguese. Even

after England and the US made efforts to end the slave trade with Africa

the Spanish persisted in taking slaves from Africa.

I can see no benefits to the payments of reraparations by many who's

ancestors had never even seen an African other than to cater to the white

guilt of those whose ancestors exploited blacks, their own countrymen of

"lower" classes, and anyone else they could lord over.

The past is full of injustices to many, who are all dead now. Let's work on

eliminating what injustices still exist in our time instead of raising troubles

from times past.
 
mach8 said:
If reparations are to be paid perhaps it should be done by the UN as the

US was but one of the countries involved slavery and the slave trade with

Africa.

The majority of slaves transported from slavery in Africa to slavery in the

Americas went not to the US, but to Carribean plantations and South

American countries such as Brazil which were Spanish and Portuguese. Even

after England and the US made efforts to end the slave trade with Africa

the Spanish persisted in taking slaves from Africa.

I can see no benefits to the payments of reraparations by many who's

ancestors had never even seen an African other than to cater to the white

guilt of those whose ancestors exploited blacks, their own countrymen of

"lower" classes, and anyone else they could lord over.

The past is full of injustices to many, who are all dead now. Let's work on

eliminating what injustices still exist in our time instead of raising troubles

from times past.

Let's not forget the reparations the Egyptians owe the Israelis for the centuries of slavery back in the old, old days. I'm betting I shouldn't hold my breath over that one.
 
Those Egyptians had black slaves too, and the Arabs, and the Romans, and the Indians (from India), and even the Africans, where does it all end? Guess europeans, mongolians, slavs, and asians made lousy slaves. Good serfs though.
 
fossten said:
Let's not forget the reparations the Egyptians owe the Israelis for the centuries of slavery back in the old, old days. I'm betting I shouldn't hold my breath over that one.

Fossten, what say you on this? (Or anyone with good working knowledge of the Bible)

'Historically, slavery was an uncomfortable topic for the church. Some Episcopal bishops owned slaves — and the Bible was used to justify the practice, Oasin said.'

Does the Bible condone slavery? I can't remember reading that part but then again my Bible knowledge pales in comparison to yours.
 
The Bible doesn't prohibit slavery and basically gives guidelines how how slaves are to be treated, however slavery in biblical times was not as we would typically view it. The only instance where people were made slaves just because of their race, the Jews, was treated as something that was not acceptable.

The Catholic rulers in Europe and the Pope didn't seem to have any reservations about slavery, it was AOK.
 
95DevilleNS said:
Fossten, what say you on this? (Or anyone with good working knowledge of the Bible)

'Historically, slavery was an uncomfortable topic for the church. Some Episcopal bishops owned slaves — and the Bible was used to justify the practice, Oasin said.'

Does the Bible condone slavery? I can't remember reading that part but then again my Bible knowledge pales in comparison to yours.

I haven't really explored the issue at length, but I have a link to a very scholarly article you can read at your leisure which pretty closely mirrors my opinion on the subject. Take your time; it's rather lengthy.

I'll list the conclusions here and you can read the rest of the article for citations and support.

Summary and conclusions:

1. The slave-system described in the NT period is very dissimilar to New world slavery, especially in regards to the more horrific and troubling aspects: lifetime slavery, forced/violent enslavement, no chance for improvement in conditions, no legal recourses against owners, bad living conditions, lowest possible social and economic status.
2. As such, its ethical character relative to New World slave is very different.
3. It was a much more neutral, flexible, varied, and ambiguous institution--blanket ethical pronouncements against it or for it would have been inaccurate.
4. Accordingly, the institution itself could not be considered 'inconsistent with' the gospel of freedom, and the NT clearly denies the idea that a master "owns" a servant (only the Lord owns them both)!
5. I have to conclude that the NT-period "slavery" in the Roman Empire is not similar enough to New World slavery for this objection to have its customary force.
6. Given this character of the institution, the NT teachings address obvious problems with the praxis and role enactments.
7. The general Christian principle of 'freedom' creates several passages that encourage the church to move away from (and avoid) the practice.
8. The general view of the NT that change should be instituted from "the inside outward" and should be a matter of individual moral decision explains the phenomena within the book of Philemon.
9. The complexity of the historical situation also argues against the feasibility of any 'unilateral abolition'.
10. Accordingly, we cannot correctly accuse the NT of "condoning slavery" in any traditional sense.
11. The use of the servant-heart of Jesus as a goal did NOT legitimize the institution in any way; the anti-slavery injunctions clearly show that.
12. The NT does not expect unconditional obedience to masters; indeed it required disobedience in cases of moral wrongdoing (similar to cases of required civil disobedience).
13. The NT literature is too 'occasional' and too early to be expected to deal with ALL social implications of the good news of God's action in Jesus Christ, but we do have strong pro-freedom elements and instructions therein anyway.
14. The early church saw the institution itself as neutral/useful for raising funds for social relief, yet demonstrated a decided preference for manumission.


http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qnoslavent.html
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top