Law Slavery reparations hearing ignites fiery debate in Congress

Fiery debate at US slavery reparations hearing

Congress examines the issue for the first time in a decade, despite Republican opposition.

www.bbc.com

Surprised no one has made a thread about this yet, given how the left has been REEEing over reparations recently.

Fiery debate has erupted at the first congressional hearing in a decade to explore whether the descendants of US slaves should be compensated.

Some witnesses said reparations would damage the relationship between white and black Americans, while others said it was imperative to achieve justice.

Several Democratic White House hopefuls have taken up the idea of reparations.

But Republican leader Mitch McConnell has made it clear no reparations bill will pass while he controls the Senate.

The House of Representatives judiciary subcommittee on the constitution, civil rights and civil liberties said Wednesday's hearing would examine "the legacy of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, its continuing impact on the community and the path to restorative justice".

Lawmakers considered a bill proposed by Texas Democrat Sheila Jackson-Lee to set up a commission to study the question of reparations for slavery.

Hundreds of people lined up outside the hearing venue and filled the overflow room to watch.

• Should black Americans get slavery reparations?
• The US students who want to pay slavery descendants
• The reparations debate is back

What are the arguments against reparations?
Republican witness Coleman Hughes, an African-American writer and New York student, argued during the hearing that such restitution "would insult many black Americans by putting a price on the suffering of their ancestors".

"If we were to pay reparations today, we would only divide the country further, making it harder to build the political coalitions required to solve the problems facing black people today."

The second Republican witness, African-American former NFL player Burgess Owens, also rejected the idea, saying: "What strangers did to other strangers 200 years ago has nothing to do with us because that has nothing to do with our DNA."

Congressman Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, was booed as he spoke against "the injustice of monetary reparations from current taxpayers for the sins of a small subset of Americans from many generations ago".

The hearing was held on Juneteenth, which commemorates 19 June 1865 when Texas slaves finally learned they were free, two-and-a-half years after President Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.

What was the case in favour?
Actor Danny Glover told the panel that reparations would cure "the damages inflicted by enslavement and forced racial exclusionary policies".

"A national reparations policy is a moral, democratic and economic imperative," Mr Glover said.

Economist Julianne Malveaux emphasised that she wanted lawmakers to address structural inequalities affecting black Americans.

"When zipcode [postal code] determines what kind of school that you go to, when zipcode determines what kind of food you eat - these are the vestiges of enslavement that a lot of people don't want to deal with."

Lawmakers also heard from writer Ta-Nehisi Coates, whose 15,000-word cover story for the Atlantic magazine in 2014, The Case for Reparations, reignited the whole debate.

He said: "Enslavement reigned for 250 years on these shores. When it ended, this country could have extended its hollow principles of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness to all. But America had other things in mind."

Back in June 2014, Atlantic magazine author Ta-Nehisi Coates made what has been widely considered the most comprehensive case for reparations for black Americans. In his piece, he argued that compensation was due not just for the historic injustice of slavery, but for the discrimination and depredation, official and unwritten, the community had been subjected to in the time after emancipation.

The consequences, in housing, employment and education policies, are felt even to this day.

His arguments resonate with many on the left, who believe the US as a nation has a responsibility to right these wrongs. There has been an ongoing debate, within the Democratic presidential field and now the halls of Congress, over the way forward.

It is also a debate that is likely to fall on deaf ears for much of the country, who view the horrors of slavery as the stuff of history books. It's an issue that is easy for political opponents to dismiss, stoking the fires of racial resentment that have smouldered in America during the Trump era.

This presents a conundrum for Democratic policymakers that is more than familiar by now. Should they try to do what many in their party believe is right - or follow the least resistant path to political success?

Would reparations pass Congress?
The issue - which has been debated since the US Civil War - has bubbled up in the race for next year's presidential election.

Democratic candidates such as Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Beto O'Rourke and Bernie Sanders have said that as president they would form a commission to study the matter.

But the most powerful congressional Republican has made clear the idea does not have his support.

Asked about the issue on Tuesday, Mr McConnell told reporters: "We've tried to deal with our original sin of slavery by fighting a civil war, by passing landmark civil rights legislation," he added.

"We elected an African-American president.

"I think we're always a work in progress in this country, but no-one currently alive was responsible for that."

And a special complementary image to go with this article:

Spoiler

 

[It's HK-47]

The modern Left has a deeply confusing set of rules.

 

[PN 801]

Nice alternative Universe you're living in there bruv.

Can Britain have God Emperor Trump when you're done with him in 2024, US? By dear God do we need him over here.


I'm a white boy from Scotland, miles away literally and culturally, and I can see right through this fucking Democrat charade. It's painfully clear what the US Dems are playing here, and, whilst not being black, nor within a downtrodden part of Inner City USA, it's utterly clear. It seems via earlier correspondance here with a black Kiwi, that this shit is actually working, and that just fucking crushed, and is crushing me.

"Stay down, nigga. We'll keep up the welfare payments, and we'll get you thousands in reparations too! Just stay in them projects and vote Democrat! Don't try to better yourself, we got you."

~ Democrats

Real white nationalist have given up on Trump because he is not extreme enough and they are backing YangBuck for cool $1000.

Honestly when you know nothing that govt will do will benefit you, I'd support any candiate who says I will get speical monies for nothing.

 

[The Last Stand]

We need new blood in Democratic and Republicans. ASAP. Lest we get another 2016 mess. And yes, I'm black.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

King Nog managed to absolutely fuck race relations into the dirt. Since Trump has been in power, I haven't heard about Trayvon Martin Version 16.0 taking over the international news for months. There is other shit, but you don't have these big race riots like you did under Obama.

To be fair, I think that’s just because they got bored of it, not because race relations have actually gotten better. Violent anger can only sustain itself for so long.

From my perspective, white people in my RL life seem to be turning more and more anti-Black.

 

[Robot Teapot]

Real white nationalist have given up on Trump because he is not extreme enough and they are backing YangBuck for cool $1000.

Honestly when you know nothing that govt will do will benefit you, I'd support any candiate who says I will get speical monies for nothing.

Well, 'real white nationalist' in the US probably number <10,000 in any case, so I don't see it having much of an impact on Trump 2020.

Regarding your second point, this is who Dems are aiming for; blacks who don't pay attention to the nuances of politics but will raise their ears at free money via reparations. It's utterly blatant, racist, and disgusting.

 

[Tour of Italy]

I did some back-of-the-envelope calculations on this earlier today.

A conservative estimate for the amount of 2019 valued federal money spent directly on black people via social programs such as SNAP, Medicare, urban development, etc. since 1969 (around the period of welfare expansion) is about $8 trillion, or about $200,000 per black person alive today / $400,000 per black person alive in 1970. This is not counting state budgets (combined 1/8th the size of the federal budget roughly), scholarships, charity, or any social program or infrastructure projects that benefited all Americans more or less equally. For comparison, the average american will withdraw $600,000 worth of social security for 25 years after retirement, so these benefits aren't ridiculously out-of-scale, but it's still a fuckton of money overall.

To put it another way, it's about 2-4% of the GDP of the most advanced industrial economy of the 20th century being directly poured into the black community for 60 years. If we're talking reparations for slavery alone, this amount dwarfs, by orders of magnitude, the amount of productivity produced by America's slave population even over the relatively long period of the Atlantic slave trade. It gets muddier if you want to apply, with interest, the impact of discriminatory culture or policy during the 19th and 20th century, or if you consider the current generation of Africa-Americans entitled to the wealth generated by the work of slaves that grew from investment. But at that point, how can you make a specific claim that wealth from slavery is more important or traceable, compared to other exploitative labor practices such as indentured servitude, or early industrial mining towns, wage-fixing from monopolistic industries etc. The whole thing drifts into widespread redistributionism, but somehow worse because it takes a unique, racially specific, identifiable evil and elevates it miles above the general grey-area oppression that has plagued all modern societies.

The main point here is that aside from the logistical impossibility of making reparations reasonable and just to the point where they're anything other than a check cashed out to people with a certain skin color signed by people with a different skin color, the massive amount of community-specific aid already disbursed to African Americans in the past hundred years needs to be taken into account. And it's not a small amount by any stretch. To the point where it really begs the question as to why additional reparations are necessary. Or even worth it, considering the fact that $200k-$400k a fucking head hasn't fixed any systemic divide, at least according to these clowns. The argument that maybe loudly bitching and throwing money at the problem isn't the solution starts to make a bit more sense. That and the thought that social programs have not been (or maybe were never even designed to be) successful at unilaterally raising the African American community out of poverty doesn't seem so far-fetched.

EDIT: Grammar that was bothering me.

 

[Robot Teapot]

I did some back-of-the-envelope calculations on this earlier today.

A conservative estimate for the amount of 2019 valued federal money spent directly on black people via social programs such as SNAP, Medicare, urban development, etc. since 1969 (around the period of welfare expansion) is about $8 trillion, or about $200,000 per black person alive today / $400,000 per black person alive in 1970. This is not counting state budgets (combined 1/8th the size of the federal budget roughly), scholarships, charity, or any social program or infrastructure project that benefited all Americans more or less equally. For comparison, the average american will withdraw $600,000 worth of social security for 25 years after retirement, so these benefits aren't ridiculously out-of-scale, but it's still a fuckton of money overall.

To put it another way, it's about 2-4% of the GDP of the most advanced industrial economy of the 20th century for being directly poured into the black community for 60 years. If we're talking reparations for slavery alone, this amount dwarfs, by orders of magnitude, the amount of productivity produced by America's slave population even over the relatively long period of the Atlantic slave trade. It gets muddier if you want to apply, with interest, the impact of discriminatory culture or policy during the 19th and 20th century, or if you consider the current generation of Africa-Americans entitled to the wealth generated by the work of slaves that grew from investment. But at that point, how can you make a specific claim that wealth came from slavery is more important or traceable, compared to other exploitative labor practices such as indentured servitude, or early industrial mining towns, wage-fixing from monopolistic industries etc. The whole thing drifts into widespread redistributionism, but somehow worse because it takes a unique, racially specific, identifiable evil and elevates it miles above the general grey-area oppression that has plagued all modern societies.

The main point here is that aside from the logistical impossibility of making reparations reasonable and just to the point where they're anything other than a check cashed out to people with a certain skin color signed by people with a different skin color, the massive amount of community-specific aid already disbursed to African Americans in the past hundred years needs to be taken into account. And it's not a small amount by any stretch. To the point where it really begs the question as to why additional reparations are necessary. Or even worth it, considering the fact that $200k-$400k a fucking head hasn't fixed any systemic divide, at least according to these clowns. The argument that maybe loudly bitching and throwing money at the problem isn't the solution starts to make a bit more sense. That and the thought that social programs have not been (or maybe were never even designed to be) successful at unilaterally raising the African American community out of poverty doesn't seem so far-fetched.

This is one of the most articulate and impressive replies I've probably seen on any forum in my entire 15+ years online. I doff my cap.

 

[TowinKarz]

I'm Half-Polish, when do I get my reparations for what the Germans did to my ancestors in 1938?

Wait, my other half IS German, so, now what? Does my left hand owe my right?

I know! I'll sue Italy for reparations for how the Romans treated the Germanic tribes, THEN, I'll use that pay the Pole in me, GENIUS!

Anyone needs me, I'll be over here playing Call of Duty and swigging Mt Dew until society admits that I can't be expected to be a productive member of such a horrible, racist, unjust society until they admit THEIR guilt and pay me what I'm owed....

 

[The Last Stand]

2019 valued federal money spent directly on black people via social programs such as SNAP, Medicare, urban development, etc. since 1969 (around the period of welfare expansion) is about $8 trillion, or about $200,000 per black person alive today / $400,000 per black person alive in 1970.

Couple flaws I want to point out with this point. Black people aren't the only race in this country that benefit from welfare programs.

And the urban development point, black people have tried to migrate from the South to other regions in America for the hopes of finding economic opportunity and equal rights. Unfortunately, many whites (Democrat, I don't know) made it difficult that owned land or such made it very difficult for blacks to integrate into white, affluent neighborhoods. The key was to shelter them into lower, kept properties and use tactics such as gerrymandering, brutality and lack of opportunities which created the likes of SoCal, Detroit, Philadelphia and any other urban city we know today.

 

[TP 200]

That's pretty damn depressing, and not the answer I'd hoped for. The Dems are despicable fucking scum.

I don't even think it's just the Dems tbh. A lot of black people just don't want to think for themselves, and criticize the ones who do. If it's not physical slavery, I guess they'll settle for mental, which is just as bad.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

I did some back-of-the-envelope calculations on this earlier today.

A conservative estimate for the amount of 2019 valued federal money spent directly on black people via social programs such as SNAP, Medicare, urban development, etc. since 1969 (around the period of welfare expansion) is about $8 trillion, or about $200,000 per black person alive today / $400,000 per black person alive in 1970. This is not counting state budgets (combined 1/8th the size of the federal budget roughly), scholarships, charity, or any social program or infrastructure project that benefited all Americans more or less equally. For comparison, the average american will withdraw $600,000 worth of social security for 25 years after retirement, so these benefits aren't ridiculously out-of-scale, but it's still a fuckton of money overall.

To put it another way, it's about 2-4% of the GDP of the most advanced industrial economy of the 20th century for being directly poured into the black community for 60 years. If we're talking reparations for slavery alone, this amount dwarfs, by orders of magnitude, the amount of productivity produced by America's slave population even over the relatively long period of the Atlantic slave trade. It gets muddier if you want to apply, with interest, the impact of discriminatory culture or policy during the 19th and 20th century, or if you consider the current generation of Africa-Americans entitled to the wealth generated by the work of slaves that grew from investment. But at that point, how can you make a specific claim that wealth came from slavery is more important or traceable, compared to other exploitative labor practices such as indentured servitude, or early industrial mining towns, wage-fixing from monopolistic industries etc. The whole thing drifts into widespread redistributionism, but somehow worse because it takes a unique, racially specific, identifiable evil and elevates it miles above the general grey-area oppression that has plagued all modern societies.

The main point here is that aside from the logistical impossibility of making reparations reasonable and just to the point where they're anything other than a check cashed out to people with a certain skin color signed by people with a different skin color, the massive amount of community-specific aid already disbursed to African Americans in the past hundred years needs to be taken into account. And it's not a small amount by any stretch. To the point where it really begs the question as to why additional reparations are necessary. Or even worth it, considering the fact that $200k-$400k a fucking head hasn't fixed any systemic divide, at least according to these clowns. The argument that maybe loudly bitching and throwing money at the problem isn't the solution starts to make a bit more sense. That and the thought that social programs have not been (or maybe were never even designed to be) successful at unilaterally raising the African American community out of poverty doesn't seem so far-fetched.

Ooh, interesting.

I’ve thought for a while about the idea of doing a cost benefit analysis on having Blacks. What you’ve done is kind of like that.

I think we’d find that Blacks end up producing, per capita, more than they consume, but by a shockingly small amount compared to literally everybody else.

 

[Kirito]

Reparations would just be a government stimulus pack for drug dealers

 

[Positron]

The Congress going full retard is just what Trump needs to secure his second term.

 

[heathercho]

Everyday you see starving niggers on TV. Then you see Jerome and Travyon on TV committing crimes.
Then Abu and Mohammad forming gangs and terrorising container ship crews.

No matter where they go, they're incapable of being productive. Really makes you think.

 

[Tour of Italy]

This is just pointless political theater that serves 2 purposes:

1. It's bait for Black voters to pull the D lever in 2020.

2. When it gets struck down it's a way for the Democrats to keep beating "the Republicans are evil racists" drum.

Missed this, at first, but I think these are fair assessments. It's critical to remember that Trump got larger percentages of the black and other minority votes than Romney or W. Bush and his support has been visibly climbing since he was inaugurated; that's one more giant thing to complicate the uphill battle for the Democrats in 2020.

On a related note, I think I remember reading a poll saying that less African Americans believe now that they need outside help to thrive than did in 1990, so the sudden focus on reparations seems like a really cynical play.

Couple flaws I want to point out with this point. Black people aren't the only race in this country that benefit from welfare programs.

And the urban development point, black people have tried to migrate from the South to other regions in America for the hopes of finding economic opportunity and equal rights. Unfortunately, many whites (Democrat, I don't know) made it difficult that owned land or such made it very difficult for blacks to integrate into white, affluent neighborhoods. The key was to shelter them into lower, kept properties and use tactics such as gerrymandering, brutality and lack of opportunities which created the likes of SoCal, Detroit, Philadelphia and any other urban city we know today.

When calculating, I only took into account the parts of the federal budget for those programs that went specifically to black people, when looking at the demographics of welfare and medicare recipients. It's a rough estimate, but it's in the ballpark.

And yes, there were a lot of reconstruction era and early 20th century era urban planning efforts (some even publicly funded) that had those effects, but when comparing the amount of funding, it's no contest even if the policies had long-reaching impacts. The federal budget during the height of the New Deal was $8 Billion. In 1969 it was $180 billion. in 2019 it's projected to be over $4.5 trillion.

My main point was to look at the scale of modern federal assistance and determine what portion of that could reasonably be called reparations, and compare that to the amount of wealth lost. You bring up an important point in the discussion though; there are a lot of things in terms of culture and policy that had devastating material impact on black communities that could conceivably be addressed as part of reparations, even though the focus is largely on slavery. It's just necessary to consider the colossal investments made already towards that aim, and really consider the effectiveness of said investments in how they've paid off (or not paid off) in real terms. That, and consider other ways that people have been monumentally screwed besides slavery, and how those arbitrary injustices can compound and carry down the line to similar degrees. How do they compare, and is it just to focus on one instead of the other, especially when the issue is so incredibly complex.

 

[whatever I feel like]

The modern Left has a deeply confusing set of rules.

Verified. Thanks @jack!

 

[Computer Boy]

Like i said before, I'm not paying them shit

 

[Clop]

Reparations? Sure, just give them California. It's yours, noggets. Seriously, fucking keep it.

The modern Left has a deeply confusing set of rules.

Rules for thee, not for me.

 

[CivilianOfTheFandomWars]

Know who had shit real bad? The Gypsies. Those motherfuckers were legit hunted. Can they get paid?
And my family came from Austria and Germany in the last few generations, no one did shit to blacks. No one should pay for something they didn’t do, and you shouldn’t get paid because someone did stuff to your ancestors, because then everyone would be paying each other.

 

[BoingoTango]

Whew, I'm just glad we all have the same opinions here. I'm half surprised and half disappointed there wasn't more bait.

@Ashy the Angel what are your dumbass opinions on Nigger Biscuits being handing out?