3 ms·
I've never heard any arguments for reparations that even approach the plausible. The real reason is obviously the grift. As for slavery: Its economic advantag
by mynameishere 4y ago
I've never heard any arguments for reparations that even approach the plausible. The real reason is obviously the grift. As for slavery: Its economic advantage is obvious when you compare the United States, especially the Southern United States, with Canada (proportionately of course). There is no economic advantage. In fact there is an economic detriment.
(For arguments that suggest some disadvantage is thrust upon the descendants of the slaves one need only compare the economic status of American blacks with African blacks.)
- pessimizer 4y agoAfrican blacks weren't slaves. Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you making the case that African blacks have been able to overcome the slavery of American blacks, therefore enslavement isn't harmful?
- dbrueck 4y agoI'm guessing the post is differentiating modern black people in the U.S. vs Africa? I don't really know. But I'm not sure I understand your comment of "African blacks weren't slaves" - plenty of African blacks were slaves. African slavery was a thing long before Europeans and Americans became customers and continued long after (IIRC, slavery wasn't outlawed in Ethopia til the 1930s). Heck, even today there's something like 30 million slaves worldwide, with many of them in Africa (though I think the majority of current slaves are in Asia).
- potatoz2 4y agoThis is a particularly weak set of arguments: Canada and the Southern US have many _other_ core differences that could explain their different outcome, and so do African Americans and Africans (neither of which are homogeneous by the way, and especially not the latter). On top of that, it doesn't matter for reparations-purposes whether slavery was, overall, efficient. What matters is whether an institution harmed someone and therefore owes them compensation.