5 ms·

But in calculating reparations, wouldn’t you want to compare the wealth disparity between descendants of slavery and the average per-capita wealth of the Africa

But in calculating reparations, wouldn’t you want to compare the wealth disparity between descendants of slavery and the average per-capita wealth of the African countries from which the slaves originally came? As opposed to average white American wealth? Isn’t the former more indicative of the damage caused by slavery? After all, had there not been slavery, the descendants of slaves would certainly have very different economic outcomes, right? But it’s probably not even so simple since many descendants of slaves also have some European ancestry by way of mixing with white Americans, so maybe we would need to figure out the degree to which mixing occurred and weight the calculation accordingly? I don’t know the answers to these questions, but surely they must be answered before the reparations conversation could be advanced.

jrochkind1 8y ago
We can talk about reparations for colonialism too. Did you know Haiti was paying back it's "debt" to France for Haitian bodies "expropriated" from French slavery until 1947?
- weberc2 8y ago
  That’s pretty sad, but I don’t see what that has to do with my questions.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    Interestingly, for you in particular, pretty much all of the evils of European colonialism throughout the world are in scope. That's because you downthread hazarded the argument that perhaps (compared, implicitly, to Africans on the African continent) African Americans were better off as a result of slavery. That's a reprehensible argument, but at least it puts you on the hook for points like these.
    - weberc2 8y ago
      African Americans are economically better off as a result of slavery than their African peers. And without slavery, there would be far, far fewer African Americans than there are today. These are facts; no serious person disputes them. It’s not a big jump to suggest that slavery was economically advantageous for the current generation of African Americans. This is simple reasoning; nothing reprehensible here. However, it would be reprehensible if I used this one positive outcome to justify slavery, which I’m very clearly not doing. Slavery is bad even if it did have a positive outcome. Of course, none of this “puts me on the hook” for other other unrelated arguments, nor do they make Haitian slavery relevant to the subject of US reparations.
      - tptacek 8y ago
        You've missed my point. The comparison you're drawing between African Americans and Africans in Africa (or, very obviously, for that matter in Haiti) is confounded by the fact that European colonialism set the course for all those people. You're comparing the experience of people oppressed by Europeans and Americans with the experience of people oppressed by Americans.
        weberc2 8y ago
        I certainly don’t understand your point. Where did I compare the experience of people oppressed by Europeans with anyone? Is your argument something like “Africans in Africa would be as wealthy as white Americans if not for European colonialism and therefore reparations should be computed accordingly”? This is the only interpretation that I can come up with, but it still doesn’t make the Haiti comment relevant.
        jrochkind1 8y ago
        There is simply no way to know what Africa, or the rest of the world, would be like in 2018 without hundreds of years of history of European colonialism -- with the settlement of the Americas and mass enslavement of Africans being part of this. To imagine what things would be like in Africa without, is just science fiction alternate history. European colonialism changed the planet. And not for the better for most non-Europeans.
streb-lo 8y ago
This of course ignores that a sizeable portion of inherited white American wealth and associated living standards was built from slavery.
- weberc2 8y ago
  It ignored lots of things. I have no idea how we could even get in the right ballpark even if reparations were morally desirable.
  - rayiner 8y ago
    Pay enough to even out the black-white income difference (about $8,000 per person per year).
    - weberc2 8y ago
      That doesn’t make sense. Without slavery the current generation of African Americans wouldn’t have incomes equal to white amAmericans. You’re shortchanging other races, not to mention everyone who has to pay for the reparations but never meaningfully benefitted from slavery.

jrochkind1 8y ago

We can talk about reparations for colonialism too. Did you know Haiti was paying back it's "debt" to France for Haitian bodies "expropriated" from French slavery until 1947?

weberc2 8y ago
That’s pretty sad, but I don’t see what that has to do with my questions.
- tptacek 8y ago
  Interestingly, for you in particular, pretty much all of the evils of European colonialism throughout the world are in scope. That's because you downthread hazarded the argument that perhaps (compared, implicitly, to Africans on the African continent) African Americans were better off as a result of slavery. That's a reprehensible argument, but at least it puts you on the hook for points like these.
  - weberc2 8y ago
    African Americans are economically better off as a result of slavery than their African peers. And without slavery, there would be far, far fewer African Americans than there are today. These are facts; no serious person disputes them. It’s not a big jump to suggest that slavery was economically advantageous for the current generation of African Americans. This is simple reasoning; nothing reprehensible here. However, it would be reprehensible if I used this one positive outcome to justify slavery, which I’m very clearly not doing. Slavery is bad even if it did have a positive outcome. Of course, none of this “puts me on the hook” for other other unrelated arguments, nor do they make Haitian slavery relevant to the subject of US reparations.
    - tptacek 8y ago
      You've missed my point. The comparison you're drawing between African Americans and Africans in Africa (or, very obviously, for that matter in Haiti) is confounded by the fact that European colonialism set the course for all those people. You're comparing the experience of people oppressed by Europeans and Americans with the experience of people oppressed by Americans.
      - weberc2 8y ago
        I certainly don’t understand your point. Where did I compare the experience of people oppressed by Europeans with anyone? Is your argument something like “Africans in Africa would be as wealthy as white Americans if not for European colonialism and therefore reparations should be computed accordingly”? This is the only interpretation that I can come up with, but it still doesn’t make the Haiti comment relevant.
        jrochkind1 8y ago
        There is simply no way to know what Africa, or the rest of the world, would be like in 2018 without hundreds of years of history of European colonialism -- with the settlement of the Americas and mass enslavement of Africans being part of this. To imagine what things would be like in Africa without, is just science fiction alternate history. European colonialism changed the planet. And not for the better for most non-Europeans.

streb-lo 8y ago

This of course ignores that a sizeable portion of inherited white American wealth and associated living standards was built from slavery.

weberc2 8y ago
It ignored lots of things. I have no idea how we could even get in the right ballpark even if reparations were morally desirable.
- rayiner 8y ago
  Pay enough to even out the black-white income difference (about $8,000 per person per year).
  - weberc2 8y ago
    That doesn’t make sense. Without slavery the current generation of African Americans wouldn’t have incomes equal to white amAmericans. You’re shortchanging other races, not to mention everyone who has to pay for the reparations but never meaningfully benefitted from slavery.