3 ms·

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.
        weberc2 8y ago
        I agree about it being impossible to make reasonable determinations about alternate histories. This is one of the more compelling arguments against reparations.
        jrochkind1 8y ago
        ridiculous. It is not difficult to make a determination that enslaving millions of Africans for hundreds of years, and the continued history of oppression against their descendents, has caused real harm which requires reparation. What is ridiculous is you trying to detract from this history by pointing to an Africa that has _also_ been obviously and inarguably harmed by imperialism. It is absolutely indefensible.
        weberc2 8y ago
        Thanks for sharing your opinion. Since you didn't put forth an actual argument, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Have a good day.

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.
      - weberc2 8y ago
        I agree about it being impossible to make reasonable determinations about alternate histories. This is one of the more compelling arguments against reparations.
        jrochkind1 8y ago
        ridiculous. It is not difficult to make a determination that enslaving millions of Africans for hundreds of years, and the continued history of oppression against their descendents, has caused real harm which requires reparation. What is ridiculous is you trying to detract from this history by pointing to an Africa that has _also_ been obviously and inarguably harmed by imperialism. It is absolutely indefensible.
        weberc2 8y ago
        Thanks for sharing your opinion. Since you didn't put forth an actual argument, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Have a good day.