US California faces backlash as it weighs historic reparations for Black residents - A state that never ALLOWED slaves wants to take billions of dollars from people who never OWNED slaves to give to people who never WERE slaves. Welcome to California.

As California considers implementing large-scale reparations for Black residents affected by the legacy of slavery, the state has also become the focus of the nation’s divisive reparations conversation, drawing the backlash of conservatives criticizing the priorities of a “liberal” state.

“Reparations for Slavery? California’s Bad Idea Catches On,” commentator Jason L Riley wrote in the Wall Street Journal, as New York approved a commission to study the idea. In the Washington Post, conservative columnist George F Will said the state’s debate around reparations adds to a “plague of solemn silliness”.

Roughly two-thirds of Americans oppose the idea of reparations, according to 2021 polling from the University of Massachusetts Amherst and 2022 polling from the Pew Research Center. Both found that more than 80% Black respondents support some kind of compensation for the descendants of slaves, while a similar majority of white respondents opposed.

Pew found that roughly two-thirds of Hispanics and Asian Americans opposed, as well.

But in California, there’s greater support. Both the state’s Reparations Task Force – which released its 1,100-page final report and recommendations to the public on 29 June – and a University of California, Los Angeles study found that roughly two-thirds of Californians are in favor of some form of reparations, though residents are divided on what they should be.

When delving into the reasons why people resist, Tatishe Nteta, who directed the UMass poll, expected feasibility or the challenges of implementing large programs to top the list, but this wasn’t the case.

“When we ask people why they oppose, it’s not about the cost. It’s not about logistics. It’s not about the impossibility to place a monetary value on the impact of slavery,” said Nteta, provost professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. “It is consistently this notion that the descendants of slaves do not deserve these types of reparations.”

In California, notions of deservedness may be tied to a commonly referenced facet of the state’s identity – that it joined the union as a free state in 1850.

“The fact that supposedly serious people in San Francisco are considering a plan that would give $5,000,000 in reparations to every Black resident in their city in a state that never had slavery is a joke,” Republican representative Lauren Boebert tweeted in March.

On Newsmax, Michael Reagan – son of President Ronald Reagan, who signed the 1988 bill apologizing and giving reparations to Japanese Americans for their imprisonment during the second world war – called reparations a “cash grab” and a “scam” that will force non-Black residents to “include the state in their will”.

“No one should be taking this seriously at all. This is hilarious,” Fox News host Greg Gutfeld said of San Francisco’s proposal on The Five. “They don’t want this. What they want is to divide people, to create another commotion over race … White leftists do worse things to Blacks than the Aryan Nations ever could.”

Under the Fox clip online, a comment with nearly 700 likes reads: “A state that never ALLOWED slaves wants to take billions of dollars from people who never OWNED slaves to give to people who never WERE slaves. Welcome to California.”

But the state’s history is more complicated, said A Kirsten Mullen, co-author of From Here to Equality: Reparations for Black Americans in the 21st Century with William A Darity Jr, professor of public policy, African and African American studies and economics at Duke University. Both she and Darity – who is also her husband – are members of the expert team appointed by the task force.

Even though the state constitution banned slavery, Mullen said, the Fugitive Slave Law allowed slaveholders to use violent measures to return enslaved people who entered California before its statehood. Many Confederates traveled west, too: brothers John and Joseph Le Conte, for example, became prominent early faculty at the University of California, Berkeley. John Le Conte, a physicist who espoused white supremacy, served as its first acting president.

The task force’s final report, which follows last year’s 500-page interim report, lays out the state’s role in detail, from how enslaved people were brought to California during the Gold Rush to how prevalent KKK members were among city officials. It also looked beyond slavery to the harms and ancillary effects of other forms of racism, such as housing segregation, unequal education, medical experimentation and sterilization, mass incarceration and greater risk of death from Covid-19.

“California, though it has this reputation, it’s not necessarily well deserved for being a more liberal place,” Mullen said. “Ultimately, what [the people of that time] learned was there was no place where Black people were treated with respect and had equality.”

That history left a stark economic divide. For every dollar that white families earn today, Black families earn 60 cents, according to a report from the Public Policy Institute of California, a nonpartisan thinktank.

“The racial wealth gap is a premier indicator of the cumulative effects of intergenerational racism in this country,” Mullen said.

Those who oppose reparations for the wrongs of centuries past may not think modern recipients deserve compensation, Nteta said, but they also don’t think they deserve to be the ones responsible for compensation.

“I don’t think reparations for something that happened 150 years ago for whom none of us currently living are responsible is a good idea,” Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, whose ancestry includes slave owners, told reporters in 2019. “We’ve tried to deal with our original sin of slavery by fighting a civil war, by passing landmark civil rights legislation. We’ve elected an African American president.”

In recent research that he plans to investigate further, Nteta and his team found greater support for a range of reparations for victims of Jim Crow policies – many of those harmed are alive today, and so are their children.

This recency is also likely a part of why the Civil Liberties Act, which offered $20,000, an official apology and other redress to Japanese Americans incarcerated during the second world war, saw success, Nteta said. It was co-sponsored by Congressman Norman Mineta, the nation’s first Asian American cabinet member, who was incarcerated with his family as a boy. While the legislation encountered its own hurdles, it eventually saw enough bipartisan support to make it to the desk of a Republican president, Ronald Reagan, who signed the bill in 1988.

In California, Mullen and the economists on the expert team were tasked with determining dollar figures for specific harms.

The preliminary projection to address housing discrimination, for example, estimated up to $148,099 per Black resident, or $3,366 for each year in California from 1933-1977, the height of redlining practices. The estimate to address these harms could exceed $800bn, more than 2.5 times the state’s budget of $300bn. Restitution over time could take a variety of forms, such as cash payments, community investments, tuition assistance and housing grants, like the city of Evanston, Illinois, introduced in 2019.

Cash payments are less popular than other types of compensation in the UMass polling data, and California governor Gavin Newsom has not endorsed the idea of large cash payments. For many in the reparations movement, Nteta said, the larger conversation goes beyond the payments themselves.

This is about recognizing one of the nation’s original sins, and the nation as a collective entity atoning for that and doing so substantively,” Nteta said.

But backlash against progress towards racial equality is nothing new. Mullen said this is the human response to change, particularly when any majority’s station is challenged.

It happened when newly emancipated Black people were denied 40-acre land grants, when the black codes restricted their rights following the end of the civil war, through Jim Crow and beyond. Historically, she said, punishments also extended to white allies who aided Black people.

“There are still lots of ways that folks are protecting their hegemony,” Mullen said.

What is new is the pervasiveness of discussion. She credits this to the expanded availability of information – documentation of more than 100 massacres between Reconstruction and the end of the second world war, online archives of Black newspapers, databases through the Library of Congress and more.

“It’s impossible to read it, to learn it without at least having to question what you’ve been taught, what you’ve read, and wonder what the implications are,” Mullen said. “Some of it is our fear of what we stand to lose.”

Both Nteta and state assembly member Reggie Jones-Sawyer, a member of the nine-person task force, noted that the size and influence of California – the nation’s largest economy – drives the volume of discussion about reparations.

“As California goes, so goes the rest of the country,” Jones-Sawyer said. “I think that’s why there’s pushback, because people really do understand that if we’re able to resolve this in some fashion, it will start the resolution of a lot of these problems across the nation.”

As the nation enters a presidential election cycle, Nteta expects the potential for political fallout to limit Democratic focus on reparations. Decades of scholarship, he said, makes the case that Democrats tend to lose national elections when they center the interests or experiences of African Americans.

“I think this will go under the broad umbrella of ‘This is where “wokeness” gets you – to a place where you’re sending $5m to individuals simply because of the color of their skin,’” Nteta said. He expects to hear Martin Luther King Jr’s I Have a Dream speech used to make the case that reparations are antithetical to our overarching values – content of character – even though King himself supported reparations.

For decades, the idea of studying reparations found little traction at the federal level. Beginning in 1989, Representative John Conyers opened each session of Congress with HR 40 – named after the unfulfilled promise of 40 acres and a mule for the newly emancipated – until his retirement in 2017.

But public attitudes might be changing slowly for a number of reasons, Nteta said, including the murder of George Floyd in 2020, the work of the Black Lives Matter movement and resistance to the ways white supremacy surfaced during the years of the Trump presidency.

Representative Sheila Jackson Lee has since revived HR 40 and, in 2021, Congress voted to advance the bill. It was met with unanimous opposition from Republicans on the House judiciary committee, who saw a panel’s findings as a foregone conclusion.

But if any state could pass legislation, it’s California, Nteta said, since a large percentage of the legislature is progressive, many of whom can avoid fallout because their term limits are approaching, and it has a progressive governor who has sometimes bucked national trends. If it passes in California, it may hit the dominoes of states with similar political characteristics, like Massachusetts or New York.

The task force’s final report makes a significant number of recommendations, including a formal apology, updates to the language of the state constitution, recruitment of more African American educators, declaration of election day as a paid holiday to increase access to the polls, expanded rights for incarcerated people and more.

Jones-Sawyer and state senator Steven Bradford, also a member of the task force, will work to put forward legislation next year. He said he hopes it will serve as a blueprint for other marginalized people, too.

“It is so critically important to do this for the welfare of the economy, the welfare of the social system, the welfare of public safety, the welfare of our educational system,” Jones-Sawyer said. “All of that benefits when we are not kept down.”

 
I wish I could go back in time and show this to union soldiers.

Not to prevent the union from winning the civil war or any gay shit like that, but because I dislike americans and watching their faces knowing they'd be forced to fight for this future anyway would be highly entertaining.
 
It's neat that this "backlash" is only coming from "conservatives" nationwide and not like, California taxpayers or whatever.
The task force’s final report makes a significant number of recommendations, including a formal apology, updates to the language of the state constitution, recruitment of more African American educators, declaration of election day as a paid holiday to increase access to the polls, expanded rights for incarcerated people and more.

Jones-Sawyer and state senator Steven Bradford, also a member of the task force, will work to put forward legislation next year. He said he hopes it will serve as a blueprint for other marginalized people, too.

“It is so critically important to do this for the welfare of the economy, the welfare of the social system, the welfare of public safety, the welfare of our educational system,” Jones-Sawyer said. “All of that benefits when we are not kept down.”
Interesting that "reparations for slavery" is now involving every other "marginalized" group, voters in general and people in prison in general. Almost like the entire goal is to seize resources to be distributed by political mandarins against the will of the people, but surely that can't be the case...
 

California faces backlash as it weighs historic reparations for Black residents​

IMG_6202.png
 
You forgot "whose ancestors never owned slaves." The only people who owned slaves in the USA are old money families of people like Anderson Cooper.
If you had ANY ancestors that came in before the 1860s, which is most Whites, then you almost certainly had slaveowning ancestors. Unless people mean direct ancestors. I don't think they usually do, though. But it hardly matters, because having a slave-owning ancestor doesn't mean much about having benefitted from it, even for ones who are direct descendants. Wealth diffuses fast and the planter class was broken.
 
If you had ANY ancestors that came in before the 1860s, which is most Whites, then you almost certainly had slaveowning ancestors. Unless people mean direct ancestors. I don't think they usually do, though. But it hardly matters, because having a slave-owning ancestor doesn't mean much about having benefitted from it, even for ones who are direct descendants. Wealth diffuses fast and the planter class was broken.
How can you post something so wrong and be so sure of yourself. LOL:

US_Slave_Free_1789-1861.gif


I know my family history, nigger, we didn't own slaves. I have a higher chance of being descended from germanic slaves of the Roman empire than I do of my ancestors owning them. Most Europeans that moved into the US were poor farmers or held low wage jobs elsewhere.
 
How can you post something so wrong and be so sure of yourself. LOL:

View attachment 5206649

I know my family history, nigger, we didn't own slaves. I have a higher chance of being descended from germanic slaves of the Roman empire than I do of my ancestors owning them. Most Europeans that moved into the US were poor farmers or held low wage jobs elsewhere.
Because most Americans have ancestors from both the South and North? Because even just a few generations back is enough to make your family tree balloon? Let's be conservative and say that from the Civil War to now is four generations, not including you. Pretty generous assumption, but I'm being generous here. Then that's 16 ancestors just by the time of the Civil War alone. Every generation you add on and it fucking doubles. And people throw shit around like "my ancestors came in at Ellis Island" or "my ancestors came over in the Potato Famine." And they're talking about just that one great-great-great-whateverthefuck their parents bothered to remember, but you look at an actual genealogy and that guy married some slag who was already in America, opening up a whole new branch of the family tree. Add in people moving around between states and it spreads it pretty fast.

It's the same as people bragging about being descended from royalty when everyone is descended from royalty. And you may well be one of those people who's ancestors were all gathered together into the same area, or came in later, or didn't. But I'd bet you I could take any jerkoff off the street from any part of the country and, better odds than not, find that he had some grandparent, add as many greats as is needed, that owned slaves.
 
California has records of roughly 5,000 black slaves, it was uncommon for the state but they had some. The idea that niggers who moved to L.A. and failed to make it big in Hollywood, the rap game or selling drugs, now deserve several million dollars each, is fucking stupid but I'm willing to fleece a few niggers out of their riches after I put a few malt liquors in them.
 
If you had ANY ancestors that came in before the 1860s, which is most Whites, then you almost certainly had slaveowning ancestors. Unless people mean direct ancestors. I don't think they usually do, though. But it hardly matters, because having a slave-owning ancestor doesn't mean much about having benefitted from it, even for ones who are direct descendants. Wealth diffuses fast and the planter class was broken.

Because most Americans have ancestors from both the South and North? Because even just a few generations back is enough to make your family tree balloon? Let's be conservative and say that from the Civil War to now is four generations, not including you. Pretty generous assumption, but I'm being generous here. Then that's 16 ancestors just by the time of the Civil War alone. Every generation you add on and it fucking doubles. And people throw shit around like "my ancestors came in at Ellis Island" or "my ancestors came over in the Potato Famine." And they're talking about just that one great-great-great-whateverthefuck their parents bothered to remember, but you look at an actual genealogy and that guy married some slag who was already in America, opening up a whole new branch of the family tree. Add in people moving around between states and it spreads it pretty fast.

It's the same as people bragging about being descended from royalty when everyone is descended from royalty. And you may well be one of those people who's ancestors were all gathered together into the same area, or came in later, or didn't. But I'd bet you I could take any jerkoff off the street from any part of the country and, better odds than not, find that he had some grandparent, add as many greats as is needed, that owned slaves.
Only 20% of households in the South ever owned slaves. Slaves weren't cheap.
 
You faggots will believe anything you read about California. The state didn't even repeal its affirmative action ban in the 2020 election (57% no). There's no way this is happening on anything like this scale. People lie to pollsters, especially about stuff like this and then vote another way. The Mexicans will never go for it either. Shit is crazy in California, but not this crazy, not yet.
 
Because most Americans have ancestors from both the South and North?
No, they don't. Are you stupid or something? Fuck, my grandmother has lived in the same home since 1920 something, her parents and grandparents lived in the same town, and I have the rest of the family history that goes way before your autistic 1860 benchmark. WTF is wrong with you? lol

Also your suggestion most whites in the south owned slaves is completely fucking absurd. The most liberal statistic I've ever seen is 20 percent owning at least one slave, and only 1 percent having over 200 to run an actual large plantation. So that's 80 percent of whites in the confederate south not owning slaves. Yeah, STFU.

Let's be conservative and say that from the Civil War to now is four generations, not including you. Pretty generous assumption, but I'm being generous here. Then that's 16 ancestors just by the time of the Civil War alone. Every generation you add on and it fucking doubles. And people throw shit around like "my ancestors came in at Ellis Island" or "my ancestors came over in the Potato Famine." And they're talking about just that one great-great-great-whateverthefuck their parents bothered to remember, but you look at an actual genealogy and that guy married some slag who was already in America, opening up a whole new branch of the family tree. Add in people moving around between states and it spreads it pretty fast.

Are you black? Why does the idea that someone knows their family tree confound you? I have literal physical documentation, you presumptuous idiot.
 
So about that plan to make Newsome into president.
I wish I could go back in time and show this to union soldiers.

Not to prevent the union from winning the civil war or any gay shit like that, but because I dislike americans and watching their faces knowing they'd be forced to fight for this future anyway would be highly entertaining.
I'd honestly do it to literally everyone if I had a time machine.
Imagine the face of some tojo when you show them anime.

Or germans when you show them german bbc cuck porn.

Or Americans and my 500 lb life.

Or Epstein and his corpse.
 
This must be a great time to be an accelerationist.

The whole idea of direct payment, get out of child support free cards, etc, is so retarded it must've been thought up by a nigger. Especially in California, where there's direct historical evidence of the Chinese basically being used like slave labor when they weren't outlawed entirely. And where there's a distinct ethnic bloc - the spics - that hate niggers more than the frothingest of KKK members. And where the state economy has been kiting checks for decades and already has been failing on basic services. Where the police have been defunded!

Let's just drop big, fat stacks of money into the hands of a minority that still mostly exists in isolated ethnic enclaves. The only way this could be better is if they mandated that all payments were to be made in giant burlap sacks with dollar signs printed on them, or in uncut diamonds, or prepaid Amazon gift cards or something.
 
Back