So, only the American Taxpayer (or White Taxpayer) should PAY for past wrongs to Blacks and to the world?
Interesting piece of trivia. When the Florida legislature decided to pay over $2 million in reparations to the survivors of the Rosewood massacre and their descendants, one question that arose was whether all taxpayers should pay the bill, or whether an effort should be made to exempt Black taxpayers. It was decided that all Floridians should pay, since the deed was done under state leadership (Levy County Sheriff). The rationale was that all Floridians today must take responsiblity for what their state did in the past.
Last edited by fwsweet on Tue 23 Jun 2009 15:00; edited 2 times in total
Why would apologizing for something you are partially responsible for mean that you are "making excuses" for someone?
Example: Two male children grow up in a home where their father physically abuses their mother. One son grows up to physically abuse his own wife. The other son won't so much as raise his voice to his wife, but she is verbally abusive to him.
Am I making excuses for these sons when I observe that their problems relating to women are partially caused by exposure to their abusive father and victimized mother? If the father one day redeemed himself and apologized to his sons for damaging them, does it mean that these two are no longer responsible for their own behavior?
It's one thing to acknowledge the effects of something on a person and another to make this person blameless in constructing their adult lives. Why are people insisting that it is one or the other and those are the only choices we'd have to understand this issue or move forward from it?
Who are you responding to?
Anyone who has equated making an apology to excusing bad behavior.
Using examples of two wronged parties doesn't pertain to the slavery apology (Jim Crow somewhat). What some people you never knew did to some of your ancestors you can't name, isn't the same as two people alive today who have grievances.
The gov't should have aplogized for slavery during Reconstruction. To those former slaves/children, it would have been heartfelt, constructive and healing.
For Jim Crow, those states that sanctioned it, yes, they should have apologized post-Civil Rights era (1970s). Anyone born pre-1960s would have been greatful.
Quote:
Now, apologies aside, it's absolutely correct to say that "putting your money where your mouth is" makes the difference. In this case, there are several actions that this country's government could take to make true amends, not just to Black people, but the entire nation (and maybe even the world), for wrongs committed.
So, only the American Taxpayer (or White Taxpayer) should PAY for past wrongs to Blacks and to the world? What about other countries? But, oh no, its da White man's fault (for everything) and let's just stick it to YT?
Today it is just too late and smacks of subterfuge and greed (reparations for work you didn't do) ...... God Almightly has settled those accounts (slavery) as far as I'm concerned. And for anyone else B&%^^ and Moaning that life's not fair -
You dont think that Congress should apologize to those A-A's who suffered under the Jim Crow era now? (2009)
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1763 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Mon 22 Jun 2009 21:37 Post subject:
sagascend wrote:
Why would apologizing for something you are partially responsible for mean that you are "making excuses" for someone?
sagascend wrote:
Anyone who has equated making an apology to excusing bad behavior.
Directed at me? If so, I don't think I made that implication. The government apologizing for Jim Crow is not making excuses for anyone. My comment about making excuses had nothing to do with apologizing. It had all to do with explaining how and why people closer to slavery who lived during the height of Jim Crow were able to achieve things people today cannot, with so much more opportunities and programs put in place to help today.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1829 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Tue 23 Jun 2009 01:36 Post subject:
DChapman wrote:
sagascend wrote:
Why would apologizing for something you are partially responsible for mean that you are "making excuses" for someone?
sagascend wrote:
Anyone who has equated making an apology to excusing bad behavior.
Directed at me? If so, I don't think I made that implication. The government apologizing for Jim Crow is not making excuses for anyone. My comment about making excuses had nothing to do with apologizing. It had all to do with explaining how and why people closer to slavery who lived during the height of Jim Crow were able to achieve things people today cannot, with so much more opportunities and programs put in place to help today.
I'm sorry but this statement is somewhat ridiculous. What percentage of people achieved what during Jim Crow?
What you said is why we don't make public policy for the exception we make it for the rule.
It doesn't matter how hard the situation, there will always be people who will succeed due to hard work, luck, or a combination of both. That means nothing, other than it is a natural human situation.
During the Dark Ages people made great strides in science, however it is obvious that during the Enlightenment a far larger number of people made far more strides.
We we should always be concerned with is what the average man would do in a given situation, not what the top 1 or 5% would do or could accomplish. If I used this measure to judge Americans, it is a nation full of lazy uneducated fools who don't take advantage of all the opportunities they are given or have at their disposal, as compared to many immigrants who come here. If I used that standard, I would be correct, but that is not how we typically measure things.
The reality is that black people in America are far more educated and wealthy than they were under Jim Crow or Slavery, so lets not speak as if nothing has changed and people are just wallowing. The facts are also clear that black achievement in various metrics have improve evenly decade since the civil rights movement, the trend is upward. It might not be as fast or as uniform in the community as some would like but most black folks did not just sit around and not take advantage of new opportunities presented them after Jim Crow or slavery.
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1763 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Tue 23 Jun 2009 02:40 Post subject:
Dragon Horse wrote:
DChapman wrote:
sagascend wrote:
Why would apologizing for something you are partially responsible for mean that you are "making excuses" for someone?
sagascend wrote:
Anyone who has equated making an apology to excusing bad behavior.
Directed at me? If so, I don't think I made that implication. The government apologizing for Jim Crow is not making excuses for anyone. My comment about making excuses had nothing to do with apologizing. It had all to do with explaining how and why people closer to slavery who lived during the height of Jim Crow were able to achieve things people today cannot, with so much more opportunities and programs put in place to help today.
I'm sorry but this statement is somewhat ridiculous. What percentage of people achieved what during Jim Crow?
What exactly is ridiculous about it??? Point it out and we can discuss.
Dragon Horse wrote:
What you said is why we don't make public policy for the exception we make it for the rule.
It doesn't matter how hard the situation, there will always be people who will succeed due to hard work, luck, or a combination of both. That means nothing, other than it is a natural human situation.
I know that, that was part of my point. No, I did not in anyway say anything about making public policy. My comment was about an aunt who makes excuses for bad behaviour by Blacks, and how many do not take advantage of opportunities. She said "it's not their fault". Well then if it's not their fault, then whose fault is it???
Dragon Horse wrote:
We we should always be concerned with is what the average man would do in a given situation, not what the top 1 or 5% would do or could accomplish. If I used this measure to judge Americans, it is a nation full of lazy uneducated fools who don't take advantage of all the opportunities they are given or have at their disposal, as compared to many immigrants who come here. If I used that standard, I would be correct, but that is not how we typically measure things.
In a lot of ways, you are correct here.
Dragon Horse wrote:
The reality is that black people in America are far more educated and wealthy than they were under Jim Crow or Slavery, so lets not speak as if nothing has changed and people are just wallowing. The facts are also clear that black achievement in various metrics have improve evenly decade since the civil rights movement, the trend is upward. It might not be as fast or as uniform in the community as some would like but most black folks did not just sit around and not take advantage of new opportunities presented them after Jim Crow or slavery.
You are so defensive. Where did I state that nothing has changed and people are just "wallowing"???? Of course black achievement has improved since the 60s, but there was also black achievement during Jim Crow. The Black Renaissance of the 20s when Blacks moved into neighborhoods like Harlem. Just one example. I can show you places were not only have things not changed, they have gotten worse. Maybe I should have clarified a little more to speak directly about an area of Poughkeepsie that 60-70 years ago was populated with Blacks who worked hard and kept their homes up. This same area is not quite that way today and has not been for almost 40 years. So in the 30s and 40s, the Blacks in that area had pride, but the folks who live there today don't, at least many of them. According to my Aunt, it's not their fault.
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 {Posts: 1829 } Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Posted: Tue 23 Jun 2009 12:05 Post subject:
Quote:
You are so defensive. Where did I state that nothing has changed and people are just "wallowing"???? Of course black achievement has improved since the 60s, but there was also black achievement during Jim Crow. The Black Renaissance of the 20s when Blacks moved into neighborhoods like Harlem. Just one example. I can show you places were not only have things not changed, they have gotten worse. Maybe I should have clarified a little more to speak directly about an area of Poughkeepsie that 60-70 years ago was populated with Blacks who worked hard and kept their homes up. This same area is not quite that way today and has not been for almost 40 years. So in the 30s and 40s, the Blacks in that area had pride, but the folks who live there today don't, at least many of them. According to my Aunt, it's not their fault.
There are black people like this in the DC suburbs, in Maryland.
The issue is "what black people"?
Middle Class to working class blacks were a normalizing agent. After integration those blacks slowly moved out leaving who?
It is just like my neighborhood, which is like 5% black, probably 15% Asian.
If half the people who kept up their lawns, belonged to the HOA, etc moved. Guess what would happen? Many of the remaining people would not do it...I am 100% certain the neighborhood would look worse in a year, significantly worse.
This is what happened in most black communities from the 60's to the late 1970's...the normalizing agent of the community left.
Its like people live in an area and keep the weeds down and the grass cut, when they leave natural quickly overtakes the area and makes it forest in a relatively short time.
Well the vegetation are lazy people or poor people who don't care in this analogy.
Joined: 10 Jun 2009 {Posts: 21 } Location: OH, USA
Posted: Tue 23 Jun 2009 22:20 Post subject:
Directed to no one in particular. I only want to say that I was a child during Jim Crow. I have only in the last several years learned more in depth about that era. I guess you could say I'm a little behind the times. I was young; my life was no picnic, so I guess I was more focused on that.
I grew up off and on around black people. I attended an all black church with my cousins many times, although I was raised Catholic. I did not treat black people poorly nor did any of my family members that I know of. In fact some of my family members considered themselves to be black although their appearance was white. I never witnessed those true blacks around me being treated badly. I was treated badly by a few black boys in the '70's who slammed me in the back with their fists while walking down the hall in high school. They called me a white bi*tch, I guess because I was white. Had they been taught to hate and blame whites??? I never did a thing to them, didn't even know them. I did stand up to them telling them, "So what I'm white and you're black what does that have to do with any of this!?"; naive young girl that I was. I then headed to the office tearing up at the disbelief of it all. I then reported the incident to our "black" principal. I can't remember what happened, they probably were given detention or some such thing. The principal was a very nice man.
Of course I feel that treating any human being in the way that many blacks were often treated was wrong. But Jim Crow does not stand out in my mind as much as slavery because my ancestors and some descendants, whose appearances were/are that of white individuals, were affected by it, even to this day. All because they carried/carry a certain surname. I have black ancestry, and slave ancestry, but I am a white-identified person.
There have been so many wrongs done over time to so many different groups of people. Apologies from our government seem useless to solve any current racial issues. It's almost as tho "some" blacks have given way to worsened attitudes since Mr. Obama was elected. We have so many other issues of dire importance to be focusing on, but if one wants to talk about making amends then I would have to agree with this part of Melani23's comment...
Melani23 wrote:
...there are several actions that this country's government could take to make true amends, not just to Black people, but the entire nation (and maybe even the world), for wrongs committed.
There are several other countries that would owe me amends for wrongs committed on my ancestors there as well. To each his own thinking according to experience; like sagascend's spice box quote
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1763 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Wed 24 Jun 2009 15:17 Post subject:
sbt wrote:
I grew up off and on around black people. I attended an all black church with my cousins many times, although I was raised Catholic. I did not treat black people poorly nor did any of my family members that I know of. In fact some of my family members considered themselves to be black although their appearance was white. I never witnessed those true blacks around me being treated badly. I was treated badly by a few black boys in the '70's who slammed me in the back with their fists while walking down the hall in high school. They called me a white bi*tch, I guess because I was white. Had they been taught to hate and blame whites??? I never did a thing to them, didn't even know them. I did stand up to them telling them, "So what I'm white and you're black what does that have to do with any of this!?"; naive young girl that I was. I then headed to the office tearing up at the disbelief of it all. I then reported the incident to our "black" principal. I can't remember what happened, they probably were given detention or some such thing. The principal was a very nice man.
Nice post, I like your website as well. When and where did you go to high school if you don't mind me asking?
Joined: 10 Jun 2009 {Posts: 21 } Location: OH, USA
Posted: Thu 25 Jun 2009 02:48 Post subject:
DChapman wrote:
Nice post, I like your website as well. When and where did you go to high school if you don't mind me asking?
Thank you very much DChapman. The site is just something I did out of total frustration. If I could go back and undo it I probably would. But...once I make a statement, that I believe in, I have to stand by it. I make quite a few statements to various people on the site.
I don't mind your question regarding when and where I attended high school, although I will answer it privately.
Last edited by sbt on Thu 25 Jun 2009 03:21; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 10 Jun 2009 {Posts: 21 } Location: OH, USA
Posted: Thu 25 Jun 2009 03:18 Post subject:
fwsweet wrote:
What is SBT's website?
Frank, the site is something spontanteous and personal regarding a very unfortunate genealogy sharing experience that occurred, and led to verbal racial attacks. I have since elaborated and expanded into statements regarding various topics that several people have criticised, or attacked me for. Possibly it is a mistake, but I'll make the best of it. You can view the site at my link attached here. If nothing else it looks nice.
You dont think that Congress should apologize to those A-A's who suffered under the Jim Crow era now? (2009)
I personally don't care as I never experienced it. Some of my family members and one parent did, but their lives are what they made it. I see their poor lifestyle choices as having a greater impact on their personal outcomes -not what some White people did to them over 40 years ago.
The time for excuses is long past. Perhaps the gov't should apologize for Jim Crow, but don't hold your breath! I would even support some reparations (expanded education, healthcare, housing options, etc) for those with documented greivances, not just 'Black people' en masse. I just get tired of some 'Black folks' always harping on slavery et al. and making excuses for boorish urban behaviors and ghetto pathology.
For those who care, I suggest they lobby for it, contact their elected offcials, donate and participate in PACs, start an educational program or something. Make an effort but do not excuse the current anti-social behavior of certain underclass Blacks with slavery trauma. So a young man of 14 dropping out of high school in 2009 is the result of Jim Crow or slavery effects?
Waiting on the government to FIX THINGS FOR YOU is like waiting on a roof top to be rescued post Hurricane Katrina.
P.S. sbt - that quote was Maya's not my own. Every country owes somebody something if you get down to it. And I don't see anybody leaving America so that the Native Americans can have their ancestral lands back....
Last edited by Melani23 on Fri 26 Jun 2009 15:17; edited 1 time in total
I have lurked for a while but finally decided to post on this topic. From my perspective, apologies are what honorable people do to make amends for wrongdoing. No, it won't repair every ill but it underscores the recognizance of the bad act and sets forth a clean slate in which the bad act will be avoided. It validates the dignity of the person(s) against whom the offense was committed. The 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the United States Constitution abolished not only slavery itself but any of the badges or incidents of slavery. The denial of full rights to the descendants of slaves is without question a badge or incident of slavery. Those rights, especially the right to vote, were denied to Black people until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1965. I find that the arguments that insinuate that slavery (and its legally defined badges and incidents) ended with the death of the last black person held in bondage tend to gloss over this obvious and undeniable fact.
The government of the United States had a duty to carry out the dictates of the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and it failed. Miserably.
And with most symbolic acts , it will not have the positive effect on the target population many of its proponents think it will.
I'm not sure what leads you to that opinion. From the posts that I have read so far the opinions on this matter seem to be formed based upon judgments of whether Black people are worthy to receive an apology to the practical future effects of an apology on Black people. To me those discussions aren't that relevant and turn the issue on its head. Apologies are not about the victim they are about the absolution of the person/entity that committed the wrongdoing.
I am interested in hearing from some of those who have posted on this subject as to why their analysis of "Why apologize?" centers on the victims instead of on the entity that committed the acts. I think that analysis is illogical. A simple example of the thinking posited so far would be to require a rape victim to prove she is not of "loose morals" before the rapist bears any repercussions from the rape committed.
I'm not sure what leads you to that opinion. From the posts that I have read so far the opinions on this matter seem to be formed based upon judgments of whether Black people are worthy to receive an apology to the practical future effects of an apology on Black people. To me those discussions aren't that relevant and turn the issue on its head. Apologies are not about the victim they are about the absolution of the person/entity that committed the wrongdoing.
I am interested in hearing from some of those who have posted on this subject as to why their analysis of "Why apologize?" centers on the victims instead of on the entity that committed the acts. I think that analysis is illogical. A simple example of the thinking posited so far would be to require a rape victim to prove she is not of "loose morals" before the rapist bears any repercussions from the rape committed.
Hear, hear. While I would slightly disagree and say that apologies can also be about the victim (and the need for acknowledgment in order to move on) I am also puzzled by the focus on the effects of an apology. What parent would raise a child to believe that apologizing doesn't matter because it will have no effect? And why presume to know what effect it would have, since you yourselves are basically saying you would be impervious to it? Effect (impact) actually has nothing to do with why one apologizes and I think most people would agree with that rationale. It's simply the right thing to do, at least that is what I was taught and what I am teaching my kid. Why, then, is it different when a government apologizes? Again, we are not speaking of reparations but of a simple apology. Symbolic, yes, but symbolic gestures can be extremely powerful and transformative, especially when undertaken by governments or representatives thereof.
Sincerity is another matter. No one responds to apologies or symbolic gestures that ring hollow.
I think many if not all of the people making this argument would also say that reparations "do nothing" or aren't deserved (the questions of who pays and to whom are not under consideration, just the idea of compensation to seemingly "unworthy" Blacks). I'm quite sure every Native American didn't "deserve" to live on reservation, every Jew immigrating to Israel doesn't "deserve" to come because they're escaping persecution or holocaust, and every interned Japanese family didn't "deserve" to be compensated. At least not as the concept is being presented here.
In order to "deserve" compensation, does one need to be perfect, or just wronged?
I'm wondering whether the notion of compensation is clouding the issue. Apologies are free last time I checked.
Posted: Sat 27 Jun 2009 04:05 Post subject: Re: Jim Crow Apologies?
Components of reparations often argue that African-American problems come from Blacks simply not valuing education! Few can explain why that is however. They do not equate slaves losing their original African culture (which is essentially the blueprint for how someone is suppose to act), and then attempting to adopt a White one during slavery, to the later Jim Crow era of having Blacks purposely segregated from Whites altogether. Whites were so different they couldn't even drink out of the same water fountain no matter how White a Black person looked or tried to act! I do not believe that it is a coincidence that during this Jim Crow period you'll find the creation of a lot of things like Jazz, soul Music, soul food etc coming into existence that was distinct from White Americans and Africans. Many still don't see how this time line is remotely related to each other.
Occasionally a die hard right-wing personality will come up with a "genetic" explanation for this racial equation about an aggressive gene found more in Blacks than Whites.
Posted: Sat 27 Jun 2009 04:26 Post subject: Re: Jim Crow Apologies?
girlfromthenc wrote:
Components of reparations often argue that African-American problems come from Blacks not valuing education and criminal behavior!
Source, please.
girlfromthenc wrote:
They do not equate slaves losing their original African culture (which is essentially the blueprint for how someone is suppose to act), then attempting to adopt a White one during slavery,
Source, please.
girlfromthenc wrote:
then later during Jim Crow having Blacks purposely segregated from Whites altogether and (AA's) coincidentally creating the sub-culture that you see today as having anything remotely related to each other.
Source, please.
girlfromthenc wrote:
We are often even told that its simply "genetic" caused by an aggressive gene found more in Blacks than Whites.
Source, please.
Girlfromthenc seems to have recently purchased a straw-man manufacturing assembly line. I do not think that anyone in this website, since its founding, has ever claimed that: A-A problems come from not valuing education and criminal behavior, that slaves did not lose much of their culture, that culture does not set standards of behavior, that Jim Crow segregation (and, more importantly, Jim Crow sundown towns) did not produce much of today's A-A subculture, or that A-A problems are caused by an aggressive gene. I think that girlfromthenc simply made up these accusations for some inexplicable purpose of her own. She has now 24 hours to retract them, source them, or be suspended.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
God Almightly has settled those accounts (slavery) as far as I'm concerned. And for anyone else B&%^^ and Moaning that life's not fair - 
at the disbelief of it all. I then reported the incident to our 
