California to consider slavery reparations after landmark law passed

[franky1]

No one today was a part of the slavery of the past, there should be no reparations.

the thing about slavery is. it comes in many forms nowadays
take the army. when on tour. the army houses, feeds you. so you dont really use money. and so when you get back you hope to see a nice big fat bank balance waiting for you.
in many cases of WW1,WW2,vietnam. this did not happen
some veterins actually got deported as soon as their tour ended

other notable acts of slavery are prison labour.
but thats modern slavery

historic slavery may show very little amount of people left that will fit into the small criteria left to be a valid compensation claim now. but the whole point is just to say its done. final. put a line in the sand and now move on finally.
this issue is that if they open the door of historic slavery. it may be an unending open door for all forms of modern slavery too.
thus fuelling more controversy, instead of extinguishing it

[JollyGood]

Whether there is any paying of money or not, is there a moral obligation on part of any state (namely California in this case) to apologise for past mistakes? Or would that set off a chain reaction where anybody can claim an apology is warranted for any historical error?

issues i see
1. proving the decendants
2. proving the original slave was not compensated when they were freed
after all having kids while  slave was not a massive thing to happen. so the decendants would usually have been birthed after the slave was set free and probably compensated.

yes there were many cases where decendants were the result of master/slave rape and yes that should be compensated. but trying to gather evidence from over 100 years ago of what actually happened and if the slave was previously compensated fairly. makes this new policy hard to determine
things like DNA tests of the white decendants of the original master to compare lineages may need to be involved.

..
for the non master/slave rape situations, but for the unfair freedom compensation situations. this is hard to prove. masters could have wrote they paid x and only paid 0.x but legally the only proof is of x being paid.
..
i dont think that the policy will just pay out all claims just because they say they are the great grandchild. it wont be that simple

There is basically no way for anyone to verify this information, California just being woke because that's where we are now.

No one who owned slaves is alive, no one who was a slave is alive. So there is no reason why anyone should be paying reparations or be paid reparations.

[Spendulus]

Whether there is any paying of money or not, is there a moral obligation on part of any state (namely California in this case) to apologise for past mistakes? Or would that set off a chain reaction where anybody can claim an apology is warranted for any historical error?

.....

I demand compensation for the persecution my Druid ancestors endured at the hands of the Romans, and later the Catholics.

[Sendoku]

It seems to me that USA is going the same way Russia once went (1917) with kulaks. Scary shit. Nobody will benefit from this, even the "opressed" ones.

[coins4commies]

No one said anything about sending people checks.  You guys are jumping to conclusions about the form the reparations will come in.  Also, many blacks immigrated from the South to Caliornia so its not particularly important that there were not as many slaves in California.  The issue is that financial harm was done and that harm has not yet been repaired. 

and of course no one alive today was a slave but most wealth is inherited and you cannot inherit wealth if your ancestors were not compensated for their labor. 

[TheCoinGrabber]

They weren't joking when they called it the Land of Fruits and Nuts. Maybe just take all of these to it's logical conclusion and just have everyone leave California.

issues i see
1. proving the decendants
2. proving the original slave was not compensated when they were freed

There is a lot of intermarriage nowadays in the United States. A few months back, I read a statistic claiming that more than 30% of the black births are to mothers who are not black themselves. So in case a child is born to a father, who is a descendant of a slave and a mother, who is descendant of a slave-owner, will he/she be eligible for reparations? Also, blacks were not the only group to be enslaved. Asians, Whites (especially Irish and Slavs) as well as Native Amerindians were enslaved in the recorded history. Are their descendants eligible for reparations?

Tyrone has been busy lately huh!

I thought California was bankrupt. Or does "slavery reparations" mean sending them to the homelands of their ancestors?

Been there, done that. Didn't fared well for the native Liberians when those people with high melanin compassion sailed over from America. Can't ever satisfy them.

It seems to me that USA is going the same way Russia once went (1917) with kulaks. Scary shit. Nobody will benefit from this, even the "opressed" ones.

I'm only starting to read about Russian history. Scary indeed. It's like America is heading towards the same direction? Hmmmm...

[merchantofzeny]

Just another redistribution scheme being passed off as "correcting historical mistakes". And they wonder why people are fleeing California.

How are they even going to track down all those descendants of slaves that didn't get paid? I'm expecting them to make a piss poor attempt of tracking them for a few months, then just "giving up" and insist that since blacks were originally brought to America as slaves, then all living blacks should just be paid, just to be sure since they can't track their ancestry. 😑

[Spendulus]

No one said anything about sending people checks.  You guys are jumping to conclusions about the form the reparations will come in.  Also, many blacks immigrated from the South to Caliornia so its not particularly important that there were not as many slaves in California.  The issue is that financial harm was done and that harm has not yet been repaired. 

and of course no one alive today was a slave but most wealth is inherited and you cannot inherit wealth if your ancestors were not compensated for their labor. 

So if my grand-grand-grand-grand-grandfather was a slave owner, and his sons lost all his ill gotten wealth, and my father worked his ass off to pass some decent coin to me, I have to share my wealth (through extra taxation) so that some lazy, poor, descendents of slaves my grand-grand-grand-grand-grandfather owned get free lunch?  How is it fair to me or to them?

What if my father was a descendant of slaves himself?  Would I be compensated as a descendant of slaves and slave owners?

This proposal is a legal pandora box.

It is revisionist, reverse racism that intends to strip mostly whites of their wealth.

What about Barack Obama?

Half white, half black, but identified as black.

We'll just all identify as black. Problem solved.