5 ms·

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' th

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.

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.