i saw a thing on fox news about this tonight, and ive heard about it before. i wanted to see what you guys think. personally, i think its a bit ridiculous to have reparations given to people who haven't been directly affected by it. i think its terrible that there is still a racial divide, as far as society and the economy goes, but i feel that this is no way to repair it. first of all, it is only going to cause more controversy, more animosity, and more protesting. second of all, it is extremely shallow, IMO.

i think that we americans need to stop throwing around money as a means of fixing a problem. most problems are societal, not monetary. the problem that exists between whites and blacks in this country is largely one of cultural differences, rather than monetary difference. i dont think that giving each black american, say, $20,000 will either make the problem go away, or make african americans feel better about the situation.

it reminds me of when my dad would get really mad at me back when i was young. afterwards, he would ask me if i wanted him to buy me a candy bar to make up for it, which is a bunch of bs. were my tastebuds satisfied, yes. did i still have latent animosity towards my dad, a big YES.

and if we decide to give reparations to african americans for slavery, what are we going to do about the native american indians that inhabited this ENTIRE continent before we came? we have basically extinguished their culture and their heritage, are we supposed to ignore that? this is just another topic that people bring up to stir up controversy.

i heard a statistic that said that only 5% of whites favored reparations, whereas 84% of blacks favored it. now, do you think that they favor it because of the ideology behind it or because they see an opportunity to receive money?

its like if someone proposed reparations for irish americans for the "abuse" that they took in the past. would irish americans favor it, probably. they would favor it because they stand to gain from it, not because they honestly believe that it would "right the wrong". what i think, what do YOU think?

PS: if there are african americans reading this, i want to hear your opinions in particular, see what the AW clan has to say.

Nobody alive today has been effected in any way by slavery. It's just some people trying to get something for nothing.

what we do need to change is the general prejudice from one race to another.

besides, if african americans get reparations, then soon chinese, japanese are all gonna start asking for it. when will the money throwing stop then? money doesn't heal wounds!

I might get back to this later to explain why.

Yes....face it, my ancestors were "forced" into taking a 3-6month cruise aboard a frieghter with no bathrooms or decent food. Stacked like wood, confined to close quarters, suffered all kind of abuse, etc....so that america can have cheap labor in farming and other industries...from the 1700's to 1860's...when a civil war was fought and they gained their freedom (oh, contrary to public opinion...the civil war was fought to keep this nation together, not about freeing the slaves...the emancipation proclamation was enacted in 1863...a full two years AFTER the start of the war), and freed slaves were promised 40 acres and a mule (some amendment that was written but never enacted) so reparations could be made to make up for our ancestors not getting their 40 acres and a mule

but, here's where the big NO applies:

1) Slavery wasn't a US only issue....we had african tribes, who after kicking the crap out of another tribe...would sell the losers to traveling bandits, who in turn, sold them to slave traders....or the winning tribe would sell the losing tribe to the slave traders directly. So, we would have to track down these winning african tribes to get reparations from them also....and this would be impossible to do, since it is rare for african tribes to write down such transactions...african heritage is mostly verbal, the tribes hardly wrote anythiing.....tradition was pass down thru story telling

2) Other countries are involved......England, Portugal, Senegal, and other coastal african countries.

3) Billions have been spent on the inner city...and look at the results!!!

4) African americans today have a higher living standard than africans in africa, and in other countries!!!!

5) This is what really pisses me off.....instead of confronting our problems head on, some idiot so-called leaders want to talk about reparations instead. Yeah, racism exist, but, I'm more affraid of getting car-jacked in my own neighborhood than getting pulled over by a white cop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Most of the leaders are still stuck in the 60's mode of fighting for our rights and against the "system"....instead of at least trying to work together with BOTH political parties (just siding with the dems is not enough) to get things done.

I could go into more detail...but, it's a day after a holiday, I'm still groggy from not getting enough sleep, hungry, and I have to get motivated to fill out some billing statements at work...get back with me on friday for more details.

Giving someone a hand out is actually doing them harm IMHO. Look at the state of the native communities.

At the same time, there is still a great deal of racism in our society.

The kind that hurts the most is not the obvious one but the subtle one that weighs on victims every day.

For example, as a Canadian, I haven't known that many black's and the one's I do are largely from the west indie's. Despite this fact, if I was alone late at night on the subway and a group of black youths came onto the car, I would feel a bit of apprehension. And probably more so if they were 'rapper looking dudes'.

Now look, I am a visible minority myself who has experienced a lot of racism growing up and yet I still have this 'survival instinct' kicking in.

Why?

Media!!!

The media has demonized the black community for a long time and while you might argue that it sometimes reflects reality, by and large, I am sure that it is a misrepresentation.

I am not a fan of affirmative action but you also have to ask yourself this.

If you look at the cross section of, say, the top grads of the top MBA schools in the country and you see a mix of races and men and women, and then you look at the top brass of corporate management and you see all white male, you have to wonder.

Affirmative action is not the answer but that doesn't mean that there isn't something wrong.

I don't know what the answer is...

should I be asking for reparations from Rome?

The 13th amendment was pretty explicit. Racism and prejudice may not have ended in 1865 (and probably never will), but slavery most definitively did.

Article. XIII.

[Proposed 1865; Ratified 1865]

Section. 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a
punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall
exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

David Harowitz has probably the best articulation of why reparations are a bad idea.<ul><li><a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/horowitzsnotepad/2001/hn01-03-01.htm">10 reasons why reparations for blacks is a bad idea, and racist too...</a></li></ul>

But, your yes arguments are, to me at least, a bit flawed. Yes, the civil war was fought to keep the nation together, but the whole reason the South seceded in the first place was because the northerners wanted to abolish slavery, and the southern plantation owners didn't want to give up their labor, or pay them. So, indirectly, the civil war was indeed fought over slavery. The Emancipation Proclamation was finally signed quite a few years after the movement began. And, as I recall, everyone was promised 40 acres and a mule, not just the blacks. So where's mine? I WANT MY MULE DAMN IT! :P And as far as the abuse goes...yeah, I'll give you that one, but I'd rather have done that than have been a Jew in Egyptian times.

Since you are an African American.

I think the reason for this is quite clear. Most CEOs (ignoring recent startups) are at least 50 years old. Which means they entered college at least 30 years ago. And clearly, in 1970, blacks were not afforded equal opportunity. I don't have hard numbers, but I be that the number of minorities (and women) who are CEOs does closely relate to the rate of Master's and PhD's from 30-40 years ago.

Another thing to remember is that education leads to more education for the next generation. I bet that almost nobody in a PhD program has parents without some college degree. So until you get a few generations of people with true, real, equality of education (and opportunity for education), you will not have equally prepared adults, and therefore you will get unequal numbers in high places.

At the very least, how would they determine who should be responsible for paying? My family has only been in the US for 30 years, so I am not connected to slavery in any way (if anything, i should be getting reparations from England for the pilaging and economic starvation and near cultural destruction of my family's native country). Just working out the logistics of this payout would negate it ever being implemented. If the gov't tried to make all non-african americns pay, then the process would be stopped by innumerable lawsuits by people like my family who would contest that since our connection to the US does not go back far enough to even be tangentially connected to slavery, we shouldn't pay.

This is not the same situation as w/ Japanese americans who were unlawfully herded into concentration camps during WWII. Reparations were paid only to those people and their immediate families. 200 years from now, if Japanese americans ask for reparations, who is going to pay? It won't even be taken seriously. Unfortunatley, race relations in this country are still regarded as a black and white issue, when they obviously no longer are.

the Roman Catholic church would cease to exist.

... there are plenty of societies that should be given "reparations" if this is the right approach. Latin American people, but only those who descended from the Aztec civilization should get reparations from Spain. Black people, but only those who descended from slaves, should get reparations from slave owners in the South. Asians, but only those who descended from Chinese railroad workers or Japanese put in camps should get reparations from the U.S.

What's funny is that no one looks at the other side of this... that these were not universal acts. I don't buy this "the entire black race was enslaved." Because, in fact, this is simply not true. Just as every Chinese person did not work to build the lines that eventually became the Santa Fe Railroad. And should the Chinese who built the parallel lines have their descendants get reparation checks from the descendants of J.P. Morgan?

It's easy for us to say, "The U.S. was at war with Japan, so Japanese were put in internment camps during World War II."

Let me ask you this: How many internment camps were in Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia to imprison German-Americans?

These problems were not global, and the reparations should not be global either. If a family that kept slaves wants to establish a foundation or work with african-american descendants of its slaves to build a giving plan around this or to establish a scholarship fund, fine... but this issue doesn't deserve national airtime and is simply another Clintonesque pity-the-black-voter scheme.

Remember that injustices to the poor, especially poor blacks, during the late 1960's and 1970's did more to screw the urban power distribution than slavery.

Cameron

... so slavery was technically still "legal" in Missouri, Maryland and Kentucky. I understand that was a compromise to appease those non-seceding slave states. Interesting document and political play (since it had zero real effect until the Confederacy surrendered - it was a proclomation about states that no longer considered themselves part of the Union, and the gov't couldn't enforce it until the North won the war).

But I agree with Philg00's premise, and would add that slavery was a part of history since the beginning of time - the importation to The New World was just much more systematic and organized. A seriously F*ed up period of time that really and truly is still affecting life in the United States. That's the bit that most people can't understand, and why they're so flippant about "hey, *I* didn't own a slave". What's done is done, and a few bucks won't erase anything at all - but it's still an issue that must be addressed in the hearts of all Americans.

sorry, i didn't make that clear =p

Today in the U.S., there are more women receiveing college degrees than men (data available from National Center for Education Statistics, nces.ed.gov). Yet, I bet in 25 years there are still far more male CEOs than female CEOs.

I don't know the statistics for 25-30 years ago, but I would bet the % of women receiving college degrees then is significantly higher than the % of women currently holding CEO positions. I suspect the same is also true for minorities.

Obviously there is still racism and sexism in the world, and in Corporate America. Also there is the more subtle racism of "he is just like I was when I was his age; I'll mentor him." But considering the rate of graduation from college 30-40 years ago, it is absurd to suggest that it would be possible for the percent of minority CEOs in American companies should match the percent of minority people in the country.

Your point is part of the reason, but there are still some bastions where even the 'entry level' people who are hired to be on the fast track are very homogeneous. It's changing but slower in some areas.

I think there's another factor at play.

Management promotion (not just CEO but all management) comes down to appointing someone to report to you whom you can trust.

Familiarity breeds trust, and people are instinctively biased to believing they can trust people who are like they are.

If someone shows up who maybe has an accent, or is a woman and all their other credentials are good, it's understandable how someone would might have a subconscious apprehension to trust a multi-million dollar division to that person without knowing them better.

I guess it comes down to networking and like attracts like.

I don't believe in reparations for past actions, but past actions have led to systemic discrimination that occurs today every single day.

It is this discrimination that has to be eliminated on a system level.

It's a complicated issue but I don't think that proponents of affirmative action are doing so simply for past actions.

A good example is the Jewish community. They were annihilated 50 years ago but that made them stronger and today they are unified and strong.

What's the difference between the Jewish community and the Black community? Why hasn't the Black community been able to use the torments of the past to fuel success in the present?

I don't know but I think that it has a lot to do with the colour of their skin.

It's a shame.

in some instances Affirmative Action is used as a tool to make it appear that a minority is more qualified. For instance, admission policies to universities. Some universities use a point system, which is fine. The problem is that they include points for minority status, which make an otherwise unqualified applicant, qualified. This is NOT the intent of Affirmative Action. Affirimative Action is supposed to make the minority be selected when candidates are (as you said) otherwise equally qualified. When employers start doing this too, it creates an even bigger problem.

I (also a white male) agree with you, but I just don't like the way some instituations use Affirmative Action.

and set their point systems to attain their quota, there is a problem. I agree that you should let the people given the task to make the tough decsion, but it should not be done to attain a quota. Set the standards based on your decsion, then stick with it instead of trying to meet a quota.

i go to a predominantly white school but the minorities that do attend the school are treated no differently than anyone else, and i know that for a fact. for example, when applying to college my qualifications were as follows: 3.2 GPA, 29 ACT, 1290 SAT. if i apply to the university of michigan, they will rate me on a points system, as Brett G said. I will receive, say, 100 points based on my academic and extra curricular achievements. my friend james, who is african american, has a 3.2 GPA a 29 ACT and a 1300 SAT, he will receive 120 points because he will get the "underrepresented minority" points. is this fair? does this "level the playing field"? it seems as though it is just retaliation for past actions rather than an actual constructive program. both james and myself have lived priveleged lives, essentially the same considering the community, and he has never been the victim of discrimination. the fact of the matter is that he would be accepted and i would not, even though all other things are equal. you know, i hate to trivialize the issue, but i have a good metaphor. when you are driving along in a 35 zone and you come up behind someone going 15 mph,you get a little miffed. when they turn off, you immediately accelerate up to about 45 mph unconsciously. just because you were slowed down before doesnt make it ok to speed afterwards, you see what i mean? THAT is my philosophical disagreement with affirmative action is that it creates what it claims it is eradicating, an imbalance between races.

i am not saying that affirmative action is bad because it doesnt help me. i am also not saying that all people of a minority are in a similar situation to my friend james. what i am saying is that affirmative action is hypocritical in that it creates different standards for different races all in the name of equality. now, does that make sense? it just seems to me that it is discrimination in the reverse and that that sort of discrimination should not be any more acceptable. if we want equality, lets practice equality. teach your children well, instill them with values of openness and acceptance. equality does not come from trying to repair a wrong in the past. and the repair should not punish those who took no part in the wrong from the past. i know some kids who harbor a bit of a grudge towards some of the minorities in the country that get accepted into colleges and jobs that they themselves got denied from, despite the apparent qualifications. without such things as affirmative action, there would be no grudge.

but dont get me wrong in all of this. i am not one with no compassion for those less fortunate than myself. i am not one to whine and complain myself about not getting into a college or job, because i believe that whats done is done, and there are no ifs ands or buts about it. game over, thanks for playing. i am merely pointing out what i perceive to be the weaknesses of a controversial system.