> Discrimination against Japanese, Chinese, Irish, German, Mexican, Native American and more are not "imaginary harms". Never implied they were. I implied that

> Discrimination against Japanese, Chinese, Irish, German, Mexican, Native American and more are not "imaginary harms". Never implied they were. I implied that the harm felt by one’s “minority friends” being helped is a figment of one’s imagination… you then replied with a list of other minorities who will also be harmed by this absurdly idiotic ruling. > Are we in favor of reparations for every group? Or is it just this one? We can safely start with the victims of chattel slavery — at the very least those who signed up to fight and die for a government that promised 40 acres and a mule and then reneged on that (extremely minimal) token — and then widen the net to those who also can make a legitimate call for reparation. > Reparation talk is a way to buy votes - nothing more. It's a total non-starter if you dig into how you'd go about it... It’s really not… if reparation had been made in a timely fashion it wouldn’t be nearly so difficult now, and even today just the very doable token of 40 literal acres and a morally equivalent mule (with interest, and a sincere apology) to the descendants of those for whom clear records exist would be a welcome token step in the right direction. Truth and reconciliation don’t mean wiping out all harm in a single reparatory act, they mean proactively working to an acknowledge and repair… the abominable corruption that is the Supreme Court just abandoned the proactive part entirely. > We can't pretend like handing people a pile of cash will suddenly solve all the issues the community endures today. Only those who aren’t part of the community can possibly pretend that a pile of cash wouldn’t solve (or at least substantially help) an extremely significant number of those issues.