The case for reparations

[Ten oz]

30 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

tell that to a Palestinian

How are the 2 related directly? 

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, Ten oz said:

How are the 2 related directly? 

Historically

[Ten oz]

7 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Historically

Israel exists whether or not reparations happened. The conflict between Israel and Palestinians does too. Explain how German reparations to Jews hurt Palestinians. 

Edited March 22, 2019 by Ten oz

[dimreepr]

Just now, Ten oz said:

Israel exists whether or not reparations happened. The conflict between Israel and Palestinians would too. Explain how German reparations to Jews hurt Palestinians. 

 

Jews.got more money...

[Ten oz]

4 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Jews.got more money...

Meaning what? You seem to be confusing the Israeli Palestinian conflict with the Germany paying reparations. It was Britain and the U.S. who advocated for the creation of Israel through the UN. Had nothing to do with German reparations. 

[dimreepr]

Just now, Ten oz said:

Meaning what?

they have more money than love

[Ten oz]

21 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

they have more money than love

To limit the confusion can you provide a citation which links reparations by Germany with the Israeli Palestinian conflict. 

[iNow]

Well, those last several off-topic posts were a giant waste of my time...

[MigL]

If any reparations are to be made to 'correct' past inequalities/injustices, they would have to be sizeable.
20 dollars apiece and an apology isn't going to do squat to correct the inequalities inherent in the system.

That being said, the government does NOT have any of its own money that it can dish out.
It is all taxpayer money that the government re-distributes, and any that goes towards reparations either comes at the expense of other programs, or has to be re-payed by our children. So although Dimreepr is being his usual terse self, he makes a valid point and sizeable reparations could hurt others.

Why not simply have equal standards going forward, that people are people, not black or white.
Only those qualities which directly affect a person's performance/actions is to be considered, not their skin color, sexual orientation, ethnic background, etc. 

Even what Ten oz did in a previous post, breaking down  voting and sports affiliation, while seemingly done to show the inherent inequalities, would be considered racist if done in other areas, such as crime statistics. So you can see the dilemma in trying to have a 'conversation' about reparations; you don't come off as being genuine if you make some areas of discussion off-limits.
Some people ( not me, I'll be keeping my distance ) will no doubt want to discuss the role/influence  black-on-black violence, and absent fathers, have on the current inequalities.
It may start out as a conversation/discussion, but in the current political climate, it would likely degenerate into race wars.
Does the US really need that problem also ?

[Ten oz]

4 minutes ago, MigL said:

Even what Ten oz did in a previous post, breaking down  voting and sports affiliation, while seemingly done to show the inherent inequalities, would be considered racist if done in other areas, such as crime statistics.

Who here denies minorities are arrested and imprisoned at higher rates than whites? Race is often front and center when discussing crime statistics. 

7 minutes ago, MigL said:

you don't come off as being genuine if you make some areas of discussion off-limits.
Some people ( not me, I'll be keeping my distance ) will no doubt want to discuss the role/influence  black-on-black violence, and absent fathers, have on the current inequalities.

Who has said any of that is off limits? It is laughable you say "some people" but not you may wish to discuss those things yet you are the one here bringing it up. You seem to be attempting to eat your cake yet have it as a display piece as well. If you want to discuss those items you listed than do so. Don't just dump than off like a loose turd and claim someone else would like to discuss them. 

8 minutes ago, MigL said:

It may start out as a conversation/discussion, but in the current political climate, it would likely degenerate into race wars.
Does the US really need that problem also ?

Isn't it often the point of political and racial violence to silence people? Fear of making the opposition mad isn't a good reason to table a discussion. 

[MigL]

I simply stated where I saw the 'conversation' going, and my reasoning.
You are already proving my point by taking a confrontational stance.

Why don't you post why you think this 'conversation' would go differently in the US, at this point in time ?
( instead of calling my post a turd because you're hurt that I used your post as an example )

[Ten oz]

10 minutes ago, MigL said:

I simply stated where I saw the 'conversation' going, and my reasoning.
You are already proving my point by taking a confrontational stance.

You asserted things which are not true. Your whole post was subversive. No one has said any of the things you mentioned are off limits. You are attempting to position your views as unfairly treated in advance of even stating them. 

Do you plan to explore your thoughts on the matter or just censor yourself and play victim? 

[MigL]

Again, none of my post was confrontational; I simply posited that any 'conversation' would become confrontational.

You then replied to my post in a confrontational manner; thereby confirming my assumptions.

Thank you.

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

would be considered racist if done in other areas, such as crime statistics. 

Nope, that is not how it works. The issue while it is contentious is that those statistics were used to implement policies that ultimately were found to solidify institutional racism, plunge predominantly (but not exclusively) black communities into deeper poverty and overall increased rather than decreased crime and incarceration rates. It is not the blanket issue of racism, rather because folks used those statistics carelessly (some would say that they knowingly weaponized it) with devastating results.

With the knowledge of hindsight, most rational folks know that this issue needs contextualization for a discussion in good faith. There, however folks who still use this issue as a cudgel.  Basically they are either misinformed or use it maliciously. Especially for policy makers the latter is a reasonable assumption as it would be their job to inform themselves before offering opinions, considering the power they hold. In other words, topics are not off-limits. But it requires careful investigation of the data and contextualization. Too often folks make simplified assumptions with far ranging devastating consequences.

Quote

Why not simply have equal standards going forward, that people are people, not black or white.

Equal standing going forward would be great. However, how would you do that considering that African Americans (but not so much for example recent immigrant Africans) have been systematically disenfranchised? Moreover, now that a conversation about it starts, folks are immediately afraid that it would turn into a race war (and it does fuel resentment and thereby the influence of the far right. Or rather, right wing groups have successfully stoked the resentments to make it part of regular policy).

It do find it odd that there are calls acknowledge the worries of disenfranchised white voters, even if they are based on erroneous assumptions (e.g. immigrants taking their jobs). However, if black folks make some noise, everyone has to be calm down and pretend to be colour blind. Precisely that part I find rather disingenuous and I have a hard time seeing it anything else but belittling the issues plaguing certain minority communities. 

In many ways reparations are dead on arrival. The public support is pretty much nonexistent. However, I do find the discussion surrounding it, as well as the misunderstandings of the interconnection of race and class in the US system quite fascinating.

[MigL]

CharonY has just demonstrated how you have a 'conversation'.
Are you paying attention, Ten oz ?

[iNow]

Could we please stop with the unnecessary sniping? FFS...

[Ten oz]

10 minutes ago, MigL said:

CharonY has just demonstrated how you have a 'conversation'.
Are you paying attention, Ten oz ?

How about you muster a response to CharonY's post. 

[MigL]

While what you say is true about crime statistics and how they've been systematically used to oppress, CharonY, that is not the general perspective.
What the average American sees is the black-on-black crime/violence and gang membership in absence of a father in the house.
And the average American is who you have to convince to have a meaningful conversation.
Attitudes some forum members display don't convince anyone, they just build resentment.

As for your second point CharonY, that is the subject of the conversation, and there are many differing and nuanced views.

 

Is that enough mustard for you, ten oz, or would you like some more ?
And how about you answer questions posed to you, your highness...
"Why don't you post why you think this 'conversation' would go differently in the US, at this point in time ?"

[Ten oz]

1 minute ago, MigL said:

While what you say is true about crime statistics and how they've been systematically used to oppress, CharonY, that is not the general perspective.
What the average American sees is the black-on-black crime/violence and gang membership in absence of a father in the house.
And the average American is who you have to convince to have a meaningful conversation.
Attitudes some forum members display don't convince anyone, they just build resentment.

Do you have a citation to support your assertion about what "the average American" perspective is? 

Exit poll from 2016 showed 49% of the public believed blacks are treated unfairly by the criminal justice system to 42% of that felt they were treated fairly, Link.A poll from this past summers shows the 3/4 of Americans support criminal justice reform. 

21 minutes ago, MigL said:

Is that enough mustard for you, ten oz, or would you like some more ?

Strange that you'd compliment CharonY for demonstrating how to have a conversation but then not pay CharonY the respect of a direct response free from sniping at other posters. 

24 minutes ago, MigL said:

And how about you answer questions posed to you, your highness...
"Why don't you post why you think this 'conversation' would go differently in the US, at this point in time ?"

Would go differently from what? It is you have asserted how the conservation might go not I. I also don't understand what you mean "by this point in time". Marcus Garvey, Martin Luther King, Medgar Evers, Andrew Goodman, and etc, etc were murdered in the 60's for discussing Civil Rights. It isn't as though other times in history has embraced equality discussion easily.    

[CharonY]

35 minutes ago, MigL said:

What the average American sees is the black-on-black crime/violence and gang membership in absence of a father in the house.

Assuming for now that this statement is true, how do you think should engagement be other than educating folks regarding the reasons? Such as the vilification of black folks, increased incarceration for similar or lesser crimes etc.? In effect what you describe is a popular stereotype-based narrative which requires some deeper analysis to understand. However, barely anyone proceeds beyond that first step (which typically is the erroneous assumption of a deadbeat father)  and puts the blame on the disadvantaged community. So, how do you think should one meaningfully engage this complex situation? Specifically, how do we address the imbalance of perceptions and power? I.e. we have strong opinions on the failures of the black community and have no trouble implementing policies with, as we know now, rather devastating effects. On the other hand, if we want to address these issues we have to carefully engage, probably everyone but the black community (because they probably have a better insight on how the system is biased against them), as the "average" American is apparently deeply misinformed.

The issue with that, of course, is that African American communities again are on the short end of the stick, and get told that their experiences do not count for much at least up until we can correct the misinformation. Meanwhile, of course right-wing media still beat the drum of black on black violence, drug abusers deadbeat dads and so on.

[koti]

Meanwhile „The Black Panther” wins Oscars, „The Orville” gets bashed for not being pollitically correct enough, Dave Chappelle complaints in his routines that he has to manoeuvre the crowd according to f up PC rules to a point hes fed up with the whole standup thing and TenOz is playing the racist victim card on MigL for playing a racist victim card before  it was played. Looking at this from a distance is amusing to me.

Edited March 22, 2019 by koti

[CharonY]

29 minutes ago, koti said:

Meanwhile „The Black Panther” wins Oscars,

That is indeed amusing to me. So a movie with predominantly black actors gets gets best Music Sore , Costume Design and Production Design and your first thought is that conflate it with political correctness? I do think that this perception is part of the problem.

[koti]

1 minute ago, CharonY said:

That is indeed amusing to me. So a movie with predominantly black actors gets gets best Music Sore , Costume Design and Production Design and your first thought is that conflate it with political correctness? I do think that this perception is part of the problem.

You have got to be kidding me. Do you seriously exercize the idea that this movie got rewarded for its merits? It's a piece of crap and it getting awards is a disgrace to cinematography. There is no clearer example of pollitical correctness going too far.

[CharonY]

52 minutes ago, koti said:

Dave Chappelle complaints in his routines that he has to manoeuvre the crowd according to f up PC rules to a point hes fed up with the whole standup thing and

Here is a thing that I find silly. Comedians often push the envelope of what is considered socially acceptable. In some ways, it is their job. And it was always a risk that they risk backlash, be it making fun of certain people, use of obscenities and so on. As long as authorities are not involved (which happened far more in the past than nowadays) I am actually surprised that comedians have a problem with it. After all it is somewhat of an expected element of their job.  

6 minutes ago, koti said:

You have got to be kidding me. Do you seriously exercize the idea that this movie got rewarded for its merits? It's a piece of crap and it getting awards is a disgrace to cinematography. There is no clearer example of pollitical correctness going too far.

Really? So explain to me how it was significantly worse than the other contestants in the area where it won, please? And I wonder whether you think that all the other winners have clearly won with BP as the sole exception?

That being said, I am glad it did not win best movie (though the one that won was almost as disappointing). BP had good bones and the world building was the single most interesting aspect (though I did not like it at first, it got me thinking after a little bit).

Perhaps to avoid further confrontation, my overall point is the double standard. Crap traditional (aka non-minority dominated) movies win and it is just a misjudgement. Crap minority movies win, and suddenly it must be a PC conspiracy. 

[koti]

1 minute ago, CharonY said:

Here is a thing that I find silly. Comedians often push the envelope of what is considered socially acceptable. In some ways, it is their job. And it was always a risk that they risk backlash, be it making fun of certain people, use of obscenities and so on. As long as authorities are not involved (which happened far more in the past than nowadays) I am actually surprised that comedians have a problem with it. After all it is somewhat of an expected element of their job.  

So what exactly are you finding silly? Dave said it clearly in his routines and there's numerous comments from critics discussing his stance. Is he a "black sheep"? Hell, maybe we should hang him for condemning the current PC culture, what do you think ?