- Joined
- Nov 16, 2017
- Messages
- 4,767
- Reaction score
- 1,478
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Let's have that conversation about reparations (Opinion) - CNN
"But like so many, I am unclear of how to define a reparations solution."
The author has a disctinct point. Reparations imply that there's an oppressor who pays the victim. The first hurdle is to identify those two parties. Here are some thoughts and questions:
Identify the parties:
Slaves and slave owners come to mind. They are all dead now, so this might be extended to descendants. Some people may not have the documentation to prove whether or not they were a slave or slave owner. Therefore, their race might infer guilt or victimization. A black person may have only been a citizen for 10 years, would he be as entitled to a black that has been in this country since slave times? What if a white person can prove that his decedents came over after slavery was outlawed? Is he just as guilty as a white who can trace his family back to the 1830's south?
Assuming race will be heavily involved in distinguishing oppressor versus oppressed, what of "mixed race" people? Half of their genetics are deserving to get reparations, the other half needs to pay those reparations. Perhaps a sliding scale could be used - payment might be pro-rated depending on the percentage of black heritage. Of course, the mechanism that determines the level of blackness, on an official level, would need to be worked out.
The nature of the payments:
Of course, the magnitude of payment is to be determined. Will it be a one time payment, or an ongoing stipend? Will it take other forms besides direct payment, such as reduced taxes for blacks and increased taxes for whites? Building on the "identity" of the parties, mixed race people's tax rate might fall somewhere in between the white and black rates.
The source of the payments:
In it's simplest form, let's say blacks get $30,000 from the government. This came from general taxes. A certain percentage of those taxes actually came from black people. Some of that money even came from Muslim women who wear hijab - certainly these people are innocent. So we have blacks paying a portion of reparations themselves in a sense. I suppose whites (to the extent that a person is found to be white) could be charged a special fee, which would then go to blacks. This would make sure that Asians, Hispanics and people that wear hijab aren't involved in what clearly is a race issue between two precisely defined racial groups - white and black.
What a mess. it's no wonder that the author quotes Harris:
"In an interview with the Grio, Sen. Kamala Harris spoke of her LIFT the Middle Class Act, which would offer cash payment to most middle-class families, not just descendants of slaves. She explained: a policy that benefits everyone will ultimately benefit black people. "Let's really be clear about that. So I'm not gonna sit here and say I'm gonna do something that's only gonna benefit black people. No. Because whatever benefits that black family will benefit that community and society as a whole and the country."
Essentially a carte blanche welfare system.
"But like so many, I am unclear of how to define a reparations solution."
The author has a disctinct point. Reparations imply that there's an oppressor who pays the victim. The first hurdle is to identify those two parties. Here are some thoughts and questions:
Identify the parties:
Slaves and slave owners come to mind. They are all dead now, so this might be extended to descendants. Some people may not have the documentation to prove whether or not they were a slave or slave owner. Therefore, their race might infer guilt or victimization. A black person may have only been a citizen for 10 years, would he be as entitled to a black that has been in this country since slave times? What if a white person can prove that his decedents came over after slavery was outlawed? Is he just as guilty as a white who can trace his family back to the 1830's south?
Assuming race will be heavily involved in distinguishing oppressor versus oppressed, what of "mixed race" people? Half of their genetics are deserving to get reparations, the other half needs to pay those reparations. Perhaps a sliding scale could be used - payment might be pro-rated depending on the percentage of black heritage. Of course, the mechanism that determines the level of blackness, on an official level, would need to be worked out.
The nature of the payments:
Of course, the magnitude of payment is to be determined. Will it be a one time payment, or an ongoing stipend? Will it take other forms besides direct payment, such as reduced taxes for blacks and increased taxes for whites? Building on the "identity" of the parties, mixed race people's tax rate might fall somewhere in between the white and black rates.
The source of the payments:
In it's simplest form, let's say blacks get $30,000 from the government. This came from general taxes. A certain percentage of those taxes actually came from black people. Some of that money even came from Muslim women who wear hijab - certainly these people are innocent. So we have blacks paying a portion of reparations themselves in a sense. I suppose whites (to the extent that a person is found to be white) could be charged a special fee, which would then go to blacks. This would make sure that Asians, Hispanics and people that wear hijab aren't involved in what clearly is a race issue between two precisely defined racial groups - white and black.
What a mess. it's no wonder that the author quotes Harris:
"In an interview with the Grio, Sen. Kamala Harris spoke of her LIFT the Middle Class Act, which would offer cash payment to most middle-class families, not just descendants of slaves. She explained: a policy that benefits everyone will ultimately benefit black people. "Let's really be clear about that. So I'm not gonna sit here and say I'm gonna do something that's only gonna benefit black people. No. Because whatever benefits that black family will benefit that community and society as a whole and the country."
Essentially a carte blanche welfare system.
