9 ms·

You do realize that every civilization that has ever existed has both enslaved others and been enslaved in the past, right? Where do your reparations end? Are y

You do realize that every civilization that has ever existed has both enslaved others and been enslaved in the past, right? Where do your reparations end? Are you going to forcefully take money from me because African Americans were enslaved generations ago, but then forcefully have money taken from them for the other Africans and other races they themselves enslaved in Africa before that? Where does it end? Do you honestly think that forcefully stealing money from someone at the threat of imprisonment if they don't pay is really going to fly? Do you think putting a gun to my head and taking money from me really makes sense when my ancestors emigrated here only a couple generations ago? How do you foresee this working? How do you foresee this helping anything? Of course my language is extreme, but that's what taxes and similar payments are. It's backed by the force of the government and if I don't pay, eventually someone with a gun will come to put me in prison, and if I refuse, that gun will be pointed at me.

fredlindemann 6y ago
> You do realize that every civilization that has ever existed has both enslaved others and been enslaved in the past, right? Do you realize that's an extraordinary claim? You have proof for this, right?
- SpaceRaccoon 6y ago
  Not defending that guy's claim, but relevant: do you know where the word 'slave' comes from?
- icebr9 6y ago
  Well.. slaves comes from slavs how have been sold by Tatars. Here in my Slavic country we even have some classical books that write about slavery of our people
  - knolax 6y ago
    Ah yes the two genders: American and Tatar.
- thegrim33 6y ago
  I know they don't teach real history in school or in the media anymore and you have an entirely skewed perception of history at this point, but it's the truth. Or course the word "every" is probably too much, because there's been exceptions. Just pick any random country/civilization and google "history of slavery in X". For example England, Ireland, Turkey, any country you enter, you'll find a history of it.
  - rsynnott 6y ago
    > Ireland Warning; while there really was slavery in Ireland at one time (indeed Dublin was one of the biggest markets in Europe before the Normans suppressed it in the 12th century), if you Google for this you are likely to get a good bit of nonsense. Decent summary here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_slaves_myth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_slaves_myth
- buzzerbetrayed 6y ago
  This seems relevant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery Obviously GP's claim is a dumb one, because all you have to do is say "Here is one counter example, you're wrong". But looking at that page makes it very clear that slavery is a big part of most of world history.
- olivermarks 6y ago
  Simon Webb is interesting on slavery history, I'm waiting for his book on this topic to come out in digital format https://youtu.be/qhw1ATYxWcQ https://youtu.be/qhw1ATYxWcQ
- redis_mlc 6y ago
  The parent comment is ignorant and pedantic. Slavery was and is a traditional human activity, and has been for thousands of years. The Koran, written in the 7th century, glorifies slavery. The Nazis had tens of millions of slaves. (The French Resistance became active only after Sokel began enslaving all able-bodied French citizens, men and women.) After the EU border-free crossings started, UK business owners had slave camps for Poles. That was only 10-20 years ago. So before you go all SJW on HN, at least learn what you're talking about. The US is not uniquely evil because we had slaves. What is unique is that we had a civil war to free them, and that's lost in the SJW narrative.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
generalizations 6y ago
I'm also curious how far back these reparations are supposed to go, and where exactly the responsibility is supposed to lie. Should the people who 'employed' the slaves be responsible, or should the people who enslaved and sold them also be considered at fault? If the second, then note a lot of slaves were initially captured and sold to white slavers by their own kind. [1] [1] http://www.understandingslavery.com/index.php-option=com_content&view=article&id=368&Itemid=227.html http://www.understandingslavery.com/index.php-option=com_con...
- seph-reed 6y ago
  Well, doing something like this right would obviously be a big discussion. But IMO, if we can figure out how much time/money was stolen and who benefitted the most from it, we can start to have some idea of what's fair. I'm a big fan of UBI as well, and it'd make a lot of sense to have the ancestors of slaves be the first to get onto UBI. But, obviously, this is a group decision and should be based off logic and records; not feelings.
  - generalizations 6y ago
    I want to know the principles involved, and the logic behind them, before we talk about calculating backpay. Those should be stated and defended successfully before anything else. For example, there's examples (IIRC) of former slaves owning slaves themselves; how is that addressed? What moral principles are in play, which can be logically applied to figure out if such a person's progeny receive reparations?
  - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
    > I'm a big fan of UBI as well, and it'd make a lot of sense to have the ancestors* of slaves be the first to get onto UBI. But, obviously, this is a group decision and should be based off logic and records; not feelings. *descendants The same issues that make UBI a bad idea will probably preclude the individual payment approach to reparations
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  > I'm also curious how far back these reparations are supposed to go, and where exactly the responsibility is supposed to lie. Should the people who 'employed' the slaves be responsible, or should the people who enslaved and sold them also be considered at fault? All those people are dead. The only entities left to sue are legal entities that aren't natural persons. > If the second, then note a lot of slaves were initially captured and sold to white slavers by their own kind. Then governments, corporations, etc. in Africa and Europe can be held to the same standard.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
seph-reed 6y ago
The following is all just an opinion, and obviously this type of subject is a discussion. Doubly so because I'm white. I don't think anyone should pay any more than they benefitted from slavery. The average person has no ancestors who owned slaves, and the only benefits they got were things like cheaper goods and services. Added up over a lifetime, it's probably not a lot. But some people come from ancestors who made a LOT of money off slavery, and the benefits of that have been passed down to them one way or another. So I think different people should be in different brackets based off how much they benefitted from slavery, and those brackets should be proportion of wealth tax over 20-30 years. Not so much to bankrupt anyone, but enough to pay the off the debt. Also, I think it should be treated as the alpha version of UBI. Basically, the ancestors of slaves should be the first to get on the list for UBI because they're kind of opposites of each-other.
- buzzerbetrayed 6y ago
  > Doubly so because I'm white This is a logical fallacy (though a popular one). An idea is either good or bad. The traits of the person speaking the idea are irrelevant, and do not make a good idea bad, or a bad idea good. Further, an idea doesn't become more or less "subject to discussion" as a result of the race of the person speaking it.
  - seph-reed 6y ago
    I agree strongly with what I'm saying, but seriously: there's a good chance of bias here, so it really should be a discussion including all sides. I'm basically claiming, ofc I think my idea is good, but I really don't want to assume it.
- horns4lyfe 6y ago
  We should probably also consider charging the Europeans that made vast wealth shipping slaves, and the Africans that profited from capturing and selling their countrymen.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
danso 6y ago
> Do you honestly think that forcefully stealing money from someone at the threat of imprisonment if they don't pay is really going to fly? How many American citizens went to prison because they refused to send in their contribution to the reparation funds for Japanese internment?
chordalkeyboard 6y ago
> Do you honestly think that forcefully stealing money from someone at the threat of imprisonment if they don't pay is really going to fly? Yeah its called taxation. > You do realize that every civilization that has ever existed has both enslaved others and been enslaved in the past, right? I'm not convinced that this is true. do you have any documentation? > Where do your reparations end? Are you going to forcefully take money from me because African Americans were enslaved generations ago, but then forcefully have money taken from them for the other Africans and other races they themselves enslaved in Africa before that? Where does it end? Claims are against the legal institutions that still exist. People aren't held responsible for the sins of their ancestors, rather the same institutions that benefitted still exist and can be sued for damages. There's a pending claim against them. > Do you think putting a gun to my head and taking money from me really makes sense when my ancestors emigrated here only a couple generations ago? You didn't know that we collect taxes here when you immigrated? > Of course my language is extreme, but that's what taxes and similar payments are. It's backed by the force of the government and if I don't pay, eventually someone with a gun will come to put me in prison, and if I refuse, that gun will be pointed at me. If you're opposed to taxation, arguing against reparations is probably the worst possible way to make your point. Slavery and taxation are quite similar (some would say the difference matters but those people are pro-tax).

fredlindemann 6y ago

> You do realize that every civilization that has ever existed has both enslaved others and been enslaved in the past, right? Do you realize that's an extraordinary claim? You have proof for this, right?

SpaceRaccoon 6y ago
Not defending that guy's claim, but relevant: do you know where the word 'slave' comes from?
icebr9 6y ago
Well.. slaves comes from slavs how have been sold by Tatars. Here in my Slavic country we even have some classical books that write about slavery of our people
- knolax 6y ago
  Ah yes the two genders: American and Tatar.
thegrim33 6y ago
I know they don't teach real history in school or in the media anymore and you have an entirely skewed perception of history at this point, but it's the truth. Or course the word "every" is probably too much, because there's been exceptions. Just pick any random country/civilization and google "history of slavery in X". For example England, Ireland, Turkey, any country you enter, you'll find a history of it.
- rsynnott 6y ago
  > Ireland Warning; while there really was slavery in Ireland at one time (indeed Dublin was one of the biggest markets in Europe before the Normans suppressed it in the 12th century), if you Google for this you are likely to get a good bit of nonsense. Decent summary here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_slaves_myth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_slaves_myth
buzzerbetrayed 6y ago
This seems relevant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery Obviously GP's claim is a dumb one, because all you have to do is say "Here is one counter example, you're wrong". But looking at that page makes it very clear that slavery is a big part of most of world history.
olivermarks 6y ago
Simon Webb is interesting on slavery history, I'm waiting for his book on this topic to come out in digital format https://youtu.be/qhw1ATYxWcQ https://youtu.be/qhw1ATYxWcQ
redis_mlc 6y ago
The parent comment is ignorant and pedantic. Slavery was and is a traditional human activity, and has been for thousands of years. The Koran, written in the 7th century, glorifies slavery. The Nazis had tens of millions of slaves. (The French Resistance became active only after Sokel began enslaving all able-bodied French citizens, men and women.) After the EU border-free crossings started, UK business owners had slave camps for Poles. That was only 10-20 years ago. So before you go all SJW on HN, at least learn what you're talking about. The US is not uniquely evil because we had slaves. What is unique is that we had a civil war to free them, and that's lost in the SJW narrative.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

generalizations 6y ago

I'm also curious how far back these reparations are supposed to go, and where exactly the responsibility is supposed to lie. Should the people who 'employed' the slaves be responsible, or should the people who enslaved and sold them also be considered at fault? If the second, then note a lot of slaves were initially captured and sold to white slavers by their own kind. [1] [1] http://www.understandingslavery.com/index.php-option=com_content&view=article&id=368&Itemid=227.html http://www.understandingslavery.com/index.php-option=com_con...

seph-reed 6y ago
Well, doing something like this right would obviously be a big discussion. But IMO, if we can figure out how much time/money was stolen and who benefitted the most from it, we can start to have some idea of what's fair. I'm a big fan of UBI as well, and it'd make a lot of sense to have the ancestors of slaves be the first to get onto UBI. But, obviously, this is a group decision and should be based off logic and records; not feelings.
- generalizations 6y ago
  I want to know the principles involved, and the logic behind them, before we talk about calculating backpay. Those should be stated and defended successfully before anything else. For example, there's examples (IIRC) of former slaves owning slaves themselves; how is that addressed? What moral principles are in play, which can be logically applied to figure out if such a person's progeny receive reparations?
- chordalkeyboard 6y ago
  > I'm a big fan of UBI as well, and it'd make a lot of sense to have the ancestors* of slaves be the first to get onto UBI. But, obviously, this is a group decision and should be based off logic and records; not feelings. *descendants The same issues that make UBI a bad idea will probably preclude the individual payment approach to reparations
chordalkeyboard 6y ago
> I'm also curious how far back these reparations are supposed to go, and where exactly the responsibility is supposed to lie. Should the people who 'employed' the slaves be responsible, or should the people who enslaved and sold them also be considered at fault? All those people are dead. The only entities left to sue are legal entities that aren't natural persons. > If the second, then note a lot of slaves were initially captured and sold to white slavers by their own kind. Then governments, corporations, etc. in Africa and Europe can be held to the same standard.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

seph-reed 6y ago

The following is all just an opinion, and obviously this type of subject is a discussion. Doubly so because I'm white. I don't think anyone should pay any more than they benefitted from slavery. The average person has no ancestors who owned slaves, and the only benefits they got were things like cheaper goods and services. Added up over a lifetime, it's probably not a lot. But some people come from ancestors who made a LOT of money off slavery, and the benefits of that have been passed down to them one way or another. So I think different people should be in different brackets based off how much they benefitted from slavery, and those brackets should be proportion of wealth tax over 20-30 years. Not so much to bankrupt anyone, but enough to pay the off the debt. Also, I think it should be treated as the alpha version of UBI. Basically, the ancestors of slaves should be the first to get on the list for UBI because they're kind of opposites of each-other.

buzzerbetrayed 6y ago
> Doubly so because I'm white This is a logical fallacy (though a popular one). An idea is either good or bad. The traits of the person speaking the idea are irrelevant, and do not make a good idea bad, or a bad idea good. Further, an idea doesn't become more or less "subject to discussion" as a result of the race of the person speaking it.
- seph-reed 6y ago
  I agree strongly with what I'm saying, but seriously: there's a good chance of bias here, so it really should be a discussion including all sides. I'm basically claiming, ofc I think my idea is good, but I really don't want to assume it.
horns4lyfe 6y ago
We should probably also consider charging the Europeans that made vast wealth shipping slaves, and the Africans that profited from capturing and selling their countrymen.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

danso 6y ago

> Do you honestly think that forcefully stealing money from someone at the threat of imprisonment if they don't pay is really going to fly? How many American citizens went to prison because they refused to send in their contribution to the reparation funds for Japanese internment?

chordalkeyboard 6y ago

> Do you honestly think that forcefully stealing money from someone at the threat of imprisonment if they don't pay is really going to fly? Yeah its called taxation. > You do realize that every civilization that has ever existed has both enslaved others and been enslaved in the past, right? I'm not convinced that this is true. do you have any documentation? > Where do your reparations end? Are you going to forcefully take money from me because African Americans were enslaved generations ago, but then forcefully have money taken from them for the other Africans and other races they themselves enslaved in Africa before that? Where does it end? Claims are against the legal institutions that still exist. People aren't held responsible for the sins of their ancestors, rather the same institutions that benefitted still exist and can be sued for damages. There's a pending claim against them. > Do you think putting a gun to my head and taking money from me really makes sense when my ancestors emigrated here only a couple generations ago? You didn't know that we collect taxes here when you immigrated? > Of course my language is extreme, but that's what taxes and similar payments are. It's backed by the force of the government and if I don't pay, eventually someone with a gun will come to put me in prison, and if I refuse, that gun will be pointed at me. If you're opposed to taxation, arguing against reparations is probably the worst possible way to make your point. Slavery and taxation are quite similar (some would say the difference matters but those people are pro-tax).