After Reparations Study Suggests $151 Million for Each African American, Experts Say Money Alone Isn't Enough
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
U.S.Reparations Racism Black Lives Matter
While debates around reparations for the descendants of slaves often focus on costs of such action, advocates believe discussions must also address other efforts for systemic change.
Financial estimates are wide-ranging depending on how they are projected and thoughts on what exactly will, or even can be paid for are also divided.
"Reparations is not a check in the mail," Raymond Winbush, author of Should America Pay? Slavery and The Raging Debate on Reparations and Belinda's Petition: A Concise History of Reparations For The Transatlantic Slave Trade , told Newsweek .
"We've got to look at the difference between changing symbols and changing systems."
Read more
- House Could Hear Slavery Reparations Bill for Black Americans This Summer
- Joe Biden Wants to See Studies About Feasibility of Slavery Reparations
- N.C. City Approves Reparations for Black Americans in Historic Vote
- BLM Global Leaders: 'It Feels Like There Is Actually Change Happening Now'
The growing dialogue surrounding racial justice following worldwide protests sparked by the death of George Floyd has also brought the issue to the fore. The U.S. Conference of Mayors has got behind Democratic calls in Congress to enact a study on the matter of reparations being made to the descendants of those impacted by slavery.
House Representatives could hear a bill, H.R. 40, this summer in regards to forming a committee to discuss reparations. Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden said he could be in favor of cash reparations to African Americans and Native Americans if studies found this to be a viable option.
"I think that Black people are saying we've had enough and I think white people are coming to grips with the fact that this country owes a debt that has been unpaid," Winbush added.
How could a cost be calculated?
If payments were to be made, the amount that would be calculated could vary dependent on how the cost is estimated, applications of factors such as interest and who would be considered eligible.
A study in The Review of the Black Political Economy journal, first published on June 19, titled "Wealth Implications of Slavery and Racial Discrimination for African American Descendants of the Enslaved," looked at the Black-white wealth gap alongside the cost of slavery and discrimination to descendants of the enslaved.
Among its estimates for the costs were around $12-$13 trillion in 2018 dollars, based upon estimates looking at land-based, stemming from the promise made to freed slaves, and price-based, considering what slave prices were.
But looking at a wage-based cost and factoring in interest it assessed the cost could be counted as up to $6.2 quadrillion as of 2018.
Clive Destiny an activist and founding partner for Unite NY addresses the thousands of protesters gathered on the lawn in Cadman Plaza, Brooklyn for a peaceful protest and march to support Black Lives Matter and protest against police brutality across the Brooklyn Bridge. Protests across the nation have raised discussions around systemic racism and issues such as reparations. Ira L. Black/Corbis via Getty Images
This amount, divided by 40,909,233 Black non-Hispanic descendants of the enslaved, could result in a total reparations payment per descendant of $151.63 million. This figure on the number of descendants may be overstated, as it likely includes some Black U.S. Residents who do not trace their ancestry back to slavery, the researchers note.
Another estimate, based upon wealth disparity, is around $14 trillion. Robert Johnson, the founder of Black Entertainment Television, suggested this sum, which would amount to around $350,000 each for the estimated 40 million African Americans in the United States, giving them an amount signifying the wealth disparity between African Americans and white Americans.
This amount echoes that of a previous study, from University of Connecticut researcher Thomas Craemer, who was involved in the aforementioned study published June 19, that suggested an amount of up to $14.2 trillion.
This was calculated by tabulating the hours slaves worked between 1776 and 1865, multiplying the time they worked by the average wage at the time, then accounting for 3 percent annual interest, as previously reported by Newsweek .
As well as reparations based upon earnings, others suggest payment to backdate the failed promise of "40 acres" promised to slaves by Union Army General William Tecumseh Sherman. Land was set aside though the order was reversed by President Andrew Johnson.
The June 19 study suggests based upon these parameters, the reparations could amount to around $11.9 trillion, estimating around $291,186 per descendant, based on an estimate for 2018.
The case for reparations now
A Brookings Institution report, titled Why we need reparations for Black Americans by Rashawn Ray and Andre M. Perry refers to the value assigned to slaves in 1860 of $3 billion dollars as another point backing calls for reparations.
"Slavery enriched white slave owners and their descendants, and it fueled the country's economy while suppressing wealth building for the enslaved. The United States has yet to compensate descendants of enslaved Black Americans for their labor," the report said.
The report suggests payments to the descendants of slaves, as well as programs such as student loan forgiveness and down payment grants.
"Given the lingering legacy of slavery on the racial wealth gap, the monetary value we know that was placed on enslaved Blacks, the fact that other groups have received reparations, and the fact that Blacks were originally awarded reparations only to have them rescinded provide overwhelming evidence that it is time to pay reparations to the descendants of enslaved Blacks," it concludes.
Activists stage a protest to mark the National Reparations Day outside the residence of U.S. Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) July 1, 2019 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.Alex Wong/Getty Images
Speaking with Newsweek, Ray said Congress should have looked into reparations long before now.
"There should not be any blocks to simply forming a committee. It should be a no brainer and should have occurred long ago," said Ray, a David M. Rubenstein Fellow in Governance Studies at The Brookings Institution.
On what should be done, he said "wealth-building opportunities" might also be an option.
"While direct payments are one option, we might also think about wealth-building opportunities in the form of tuition payments, housing grants, and small business grants," he said.
Winbush echoed that the time for reparations had come.
"The reparations movement is old. I think that people think it's very young," he told Newsweek , suggesting people linking it to Black Lives Matter makes them think it does not go as far back as it does.
"It goes back well over 200 years in this country," said Winbush, also a research professor and the Director of the Institute for Urban Research at Morgan State University, commenting on how social media in recent years has brought it to the fore.
More than just money
Winbush also suggested that while handing out money is an option, other methods of reparations, focusing on systemic change, could be implemented.
"If we were to say, 'just give everybody a check,' that's only a partial solution. I think reparations has been narrowly defined as it's related to money," he said.
"It's acknowledgement by a nation that they did something wrong. One way of atoning for that is money. But it's a variety of solutions."
Roy L. Brooks, author of Atonement and Forgiveness: A New Model for Black Reparations and Sorry Isn't Enough: The Controversy Over Apologies and Reparations for Human Injustice suggested that reparations must look at factors other than simply money.
"One of the most important responsibilities of the commission would be to educate the American people, including African-Americans, not only about slavery and its lingering effects, but also about the fact that reparations come in many forms and are not the only way to redress slavery," he told Newsweek .
"Apologies, truth commissions, truth trials, and reparations are just a few of the ways to redress any atrocity, whether it is slavery, Japanese-American internment or the Holocaust. Calculations are complex but not impossible because they have been performed all over the world in the last 70 years."
Regarding the cost of reparations, he said African-Americans will have to work through the models and issues in the context of the commission.
"Until that happens, it is not only premature to talk about the "cost" of reparations (or more generally slave redress), it is irresponsible," said Brooks, who is also a professor at the University of San Diego.
The costs of slavery
Joe Feagin, author of The White Racial Frame and co-author of Racist America: Roots, Current Realities, and Future Reparations , and Racial and Ethnic Relations , similarly told Newsweek that there needs to be an examination of the "many other costs of slavery."
He said: "For example, how do you calculate the costs of great pain and suffering, and lives lost or cut short?"
Stating that most reparations estimates calculate "just the labor and wealth lost," he added, "I think it is at least as important to talk about the many other costs of slavery."
In terms of a starting point for reparations being paid, he suggested beginning with people who suffered under segregation.
"Start with reparations for Jim Crow, no questions there about the white nonsense about this harm happened centuries ago and we cannot figure out who did what to whom," he said. "Start with the living folks and then work backwards to slavery."
Deciding the amount
Craemer, whose research is mentioned above, suggested the work of a commission in looking at the financial costs has largely already been done—though stated issues that are difficult to quantify need to be looked at, with the descendant community integral in choosing an outcome.
"I would say, the commission's work has largely been done. It might be more reasonable to proceed directly to reparations," he told Newsweek .
"Otherwise, the need for further study may be misused by reparations opponents to indefinitely delay implementation. This has disadvantages not only for eligible recipients, but also for the U.S. government—reparations become exponentially more expensive the longer we wait."
With regards to the sum of reparations, he said estimates only address the financial aspect of slavery, not looking at its other implications.
"These specific estimates only address the value of slavery in the United States, they do not address colonial slavery, or racial discrimination after slavery. Also, they only address lost inheritances, they do not address loss of freedom, loss of other opportunities, or withheld compensation for pain and suffering," he said.
"In my view, it is up to negotiations between the descendant community and the federal government to determine whether the entire estimate should be compensated, or only a portion, at what interest rate, and using what estimation method."
Despite the increased discussion on the matter, polling from earlier this year found that only one in five asked felt the U.S. should spend "taxpayer money to pay damages to descendants of enslaved people in the United States," according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll which asked 1,115 adults in June.
Ray said the issue of reparations happening should no longer be a point of discussion.
"If 40 acres and a Mule was actually implemented we wouldn't be having this conversation," he told Newsweek . "Time is up. This needs to happen."
Tags
Who is online
431 visitors
What do I call reparations? A good start! Let's Go!
"But looking at a wage-based cost and factoring in interest it assessed the cost could be counted as up to $6.2 quadrillion as of 2018."
Get serious! Who's gonna pay for it?
Dontcha know, Greg.
The man owes that money
For the freed slaves, who actually endured slavery, a mule and 40 acres of land was the plan. Lincoln's assassination ended all such ideas from happening.
There is nobody today who is owed anything, nor is there anyone alive who is responsible.
Some people think that slavery was a good thing for the Africans and their descendants, as it civilized the brutes and taught them the fear of God.
Come to think of it, that was pretty much the entire confederate position.
That was then, this is now
I think I would have had an even harsher reconstruction than the Republicans of the 1860's proposed.
The freed slaves would have gotten those 40 acres - from all the confiscated plantations.....
and oh yes....
Every slave trader who brought a slave from Africa to the US would be hanged in the town square!
That's nice but they got no 40 acres or mules.
Compound interest for 155 years is a bitch...
They are long gone.
Not being able to collect is a bigger bitch!
Not really. Compounded interest at 0 for 155 years is still 0
Not even the mule and the 40 acres.
Today, the correct means is to work for what you want.
Handouts are for losers
Just as long as you would have been supporting hanging the Yankee bankers that financed slave trade and made the big profits off of southern cotton. The slave traders that did the dirty work did not get the most money and slave trade on a large scale would not have been possible without Northern bankers. They financed the ships of triangle trade.
Who would be willing to pay anything for such foolishness?
The good folks addicted to spending OPM.
Or a party trying to buy voters.
Which is just a touch ironic when you think about it.
buying votes. Lyndon B Johnson's plan to get them (you know what he called them) to vote Democratic for a 100 years is coming up short
A profoundly ignorant sentiment.
The truth sometimes hurts.
Reparations is not about individual white Americans being responsible for slavery and Jim Crow and racial segregation, although many alive today are individually responsible, but it is an acknowledgement that America has historically been a racist country. This is utterly indisputable.
So we have had a racist country for hundreds of years, but no racist individuals? lol.
Of course there are racist individuals, no one said there wasn't. Why do you constantly make stuff up?
Oh there are racist individuals , just not "me" or "you". You do understand that is the implication of the meme you posted, dont you?
No it isn't. It points to the fact that that shit happened years and years ago and there is no one alive that was a fucking slave. Reparations, in other words, are bullshit.
Of course I understand it, do you? My ancestors came to this country after slavery was abolished, am I absolved from paying out any reparations?
OK, So all the individuals that owned slaves should give all the people that were slaves a check even though it was legal to do so back then. Since they are all dead it is a moot point anyway.
If you want to say people today should pay for the actions of people of the past (not even necessarily people that were guilty of anything) than my ancestors were fed to the lions so I should be getting a check for that.
Actually, its right on the money.
Let's see if you can be honest here
I don't care if no one in your family ever owned slaves. Do you think you still owe something even though there were no owned slaves...and... if you do
why don't you just give up everything YOU own for the cause?
More recent immigrants could pay a buyin...
You could always make your own reparations to alleviate whatever white guilt you may or may not have.
I think everyone who feels as you do should follow suit and then we will all be happier.
Yeah, that would fly real well with the progressive liberals who don't even want the government to be assured that immigrants can support themselves fully without government handouts.
LOL.
I think white Americans at the bare minimum owe black Americans the benefit of the doubt. White Americans owe black Americans a hearing ear and after we've listened to them and believe them instead of simply dismissing them as ungrateful boat rockers as many white conservatives seem to have done over the last few centuries, then we can have an open discussion about where we as a society go from here. Sure, the easy way forward is to just pretend like racism doesn't exist anymore, to ignore it and pretend to be color blind while still avoiding each other, not living in the same neighborhoods, not looking each other in the eye and continue to, as they used to say, "keep to our own" as white conservatives seem to have been recommending since long before the civil rights act was signed.
The apparent right wing conservative plan to address racism in American society is akin to their plan to prevent kids from learning about homosexuality because they fear their kids turning gay so they ban discussions of sexual orientation in classrooms, as if just not talking about it will prevent kids from being born gay.
In regards to systemic racism the conservative plan is similar and entails just not mentioning race when it comes to admissions, hiring, pay equity, justice system racial inequity, housing and public education.
Conservatives seem to believe that if we just don't talk about it then racial inequity can't actually be happening because they're not openly telling black Americans they're being pulled over and searched because they're black even though the facts show black Americans and pulled over and searched 4 times as often as white drivers even though contraband is found twice as often on white drivers. Black Americans are also more likely to serve longer sentences than whites convicted of the same crimes and are less likely to see early release or be paroled. But despite all the evidence many white conservatives apparently think that as long as no one said they did it because the suspect or defendant was black, then the outrageous disparities in outcomes found don't matter and aren't really evidence of racism.
So mostly what I think we owe our fellow black Americans is truth and honesty. We owe it to black Americans to be courageous enough to discuss the disparities found honestly and openly even when it might be uncomfortable for some [ Deleted ] racist who justifies the disparities with deep seated prejudices likely passed on to them by their bigoted conservative parents and grandparents.
https://www.vera.org/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden#:~:text=The%20evidence%20for%20racial%20disparities,low%2Dincome%20communities%20of%20color .
No less than the Supreme Court failed time after time to uphold the Constitution
and allowed flawed ideas like "separate but "equal"" and until very recently, redlining
and unconstitutional deeds and covenants, which at one point they ruled "unenforceable",
thus forcing thousands of unnecessary lawsuits instead of just declaring said practices by banks,
developers and landowners illegal.
That is the crux of CRT, the legal study of codified discrimination from the SCOTUS to the corner Savings and Loan banks.
I don't know what the solution is, personal reparations are unlikely,
but the Government and the financial institutions they protected should be made to pay in some fashion
for the sins of "their" fathers and predecessors.
Citation? Who has referred to them as such?
The other easy way forward is simply to write a check with other people's money.
You seem to have little idea what conservatives actually believe.
When you're ready to start, let us know.
[Deleted]
Why would/should they?
Are you an American or a visitor?
A day or two ago there was a news story about how the Wells Fargo bank rejects black applications for home refinancing at a rate four of five times higher than the rate they reject whites for the same loan.
CRT, alive and well and codified into our banking systems.
the Government and the financial institutions they protected should be made to pay in some fashion
for the sins of "their" fathers and predecessors.
Why?
It's called justice. What is a world without justice?
The real world.
Which loan has better chance of making a profit to stockholders?
who gives a fuck? you want to continue racial injustice in order to assure better stock market returns?
Were their job histories and credit scores comparable?
My main concern is a positive return on my investments. Other people's finances are their problems not mine.
Not justice, just an attempted money grab
I give a fuck it they are trying to take something from me or trying to make me pay some kind of bullshit extra tax to give away. I don't cuss much here; but, fuck that shit!
I think Mexican immigrants should pay.
After all, Mexico is not sending us their best-- their sending us drug dealers and the like.
Let 'em pay!
Those that favor this should put THEIR money where their mouth is, leave the rest of us alone because we ain't giving up anything for this money grab. If they feel guilty for some strange reason and want to give up their money that is their decision: however, their heirs should demand a competency hearing.
Justice for what??? For their forefathers selling them into slavery in Africa??? For the Euro traders making big bucks for buying and reselling them to willing buyers - in Europe and Asia and the ME?? We have to pay for their crimes???
Being penalized because of the color of my skin or for something neither me or my ancestors had nothing to do with is called justice? Maybe in some bizzaro world that the liberals live in but we in the real world call it a scam to steal other peoples money.
You saying that without irony is just stunning!
How would black Americans feel reading that?
How would black Americans feel about being held accountable for something they had absolutely nothing to do with?
Monetary reparations for individuals, while with merit, would likely be very impractical for two reasons - it would be very expensive at this point, and there is no foolproof way to determine who (individuals) is owed the money.
The position of many whites that everyone should just let bygones be bygones when it comes to 400 years of racial discrimination is not going to work either though.
No one. Period.
Monetary reparations for individuals, while with merit, would likely be very impractical for two reasons - it would be very expensive at this point, and there is no foolproof way to determine who (individuals) is owed the money.
And a third reason-- should only Whites pay?
What about a person who ancestry is 1/s Black-- and 1/2 White?
Is that person a victim of slavery-- or a victimizer?
And should all people of African descent get the money? What about African-American millionaires? Even if their ancestors suffered greatly from slavery-- should middle-class Whites have to pay reparations to Black millionaires? (We'd haveto revise the tax code, to say the least).
And then there are even a small number of Black billionaires...
what about descendants of free blacks who owned slaves? would they pay or get?
On payment plan that is only about $350,000 a year...
Money can't buy happiness, but it's a down payment!
Why not just work for what you want?
[deleted]
" the survey finds virtually no difference in the share of conservatives (57%) , liberals (53%) or political moderates (53%) who have been assisted by at least one entitlement program ."
Seems even more conservatives use entitlements than liberals, so your impression of who the ones waiting for a handout are is completely backwards.
Well, let's go with average cost of an acre in today's world ($12,000) times the amount of lands taken from the Native Americans (1.5B acres) equals $18,000,000,000,000.00.
Yup - damn good down payment.
The difference? Native American lands were taken - stolen - legislated from the Native Americans to be given to Dominant Society (because we weren't "efficiently" using it). Black American lands were taken by their relatives/neighbors/warlords in AFRICA and sold by other AFRICANS and other Euro/Asian/ME countries, not the U.S. until the 1700's/1800's.
So, how 'bout giving the Native Americans our lands back or give us the "down payment" of $18T.
Workable?
I'll wait.
Still waiting.
That's a common misconception.
BTW someone recommended an interesting book (I haven't read it yet)-- it r=tracks the lives of winners of big lotteries-- and how their changed over time.
Let’s address the elephant in the room: reparations would only serve to make racists more racist.
[deleted]
Very true.. you know the old adage? give a mouse a cookie and he's gonna want a glass of milk...
Where does the democrat pandering to the negro end? Are they all brainless vote machines like LBJ claimed? Drop a quarter into the hand and they pull a lever?
Cause that is what this is, straight up vote buying... And push it through now cause come November, they aren't going to have a majority anywhere...
And if this negro vote buying scheme carries the day, then it is complete proof that the bicameral congress and elections system has been perverted by politics, greed and money and not to be relied upon ever again...
But then again, that was the point of what LBJ was saying back then, wasn't it?
Racism works, especially in politics...
Negro is not an acceptable term anymore. Join this century.
SJW alert, everyone!
Really? {chuckle} [Deleted]
and we know what you are.
another dimwit
Here, let me finish that for you:
Another dimwit who points out useless information and pretends it is rational debate.
Like the use of a particular word that was recognized by everyone for decades.
Not one thing wrong with using Negro.
[removed]
Yeah so do I, someone who vehemently disagrees with the blatant racism inherent today in the democrat party... It's part of their political philosophy...
Lemme take a guess....
Cause racists don't like it?
You'll have to excuse me.
I'll never be "woke" enough to be a SJW like you.
Oh well, I'll just have to learn to live with it!
Next will come accusations of racism.
Here is another LBJ quote.
Even then, Democrats were good at spending OPM.
The basic principle is that members of a group get to decide what their group is called, not people who aren’t members of the group. The word “Negro” became offensive to many black people in the 1960s and 1970s, because the term evoked a time period when black people had fewer rights. As a result, some black people aren’t going to feel comfortable with the term. In addition, there were white segregationists within living memory who might not use a crude racial slur like the N-word, but they would insist on calling black people “Negroes,” never “black” or “African-American.” Once “Negro” was used by people who refused to respect the right of black people to call themselves what they wanted to be called, “Negro” became an offensive term, because the term ceased to be a simple descriptor and became an indication that the speaker might hold segregationist sympathies.
If you’re not black, you don’t get to decide what black people are called. That’s the basic principle, and white people should stop whining about it. Yes, the U.S. Census does include the terms “Negro” and “colored” as alternative terms of racial self-definition. That’s because if some 103-year-old African-American great grandma who grew up in the Jim Crow period wants to call herself “colored” or “Negro,” because that is what she is used to, that is her right. It’s not your right. White guys like to bring up how rappers will use the N-word and whine about why they can’t say it too, but the basic rule about how in-group members have more rights to decide what their in-group is called still applies here.
That is a lot of words but the fact remains I will use it if I choose and if you are offended, tough shit.
I don't feel obligated to be politically correct in every word choice to suit YOU.
Its actually not that many words. Maybe you get tired easily.
Far too many than the subject deserves.
Battling SJWs gets old and tiring.
"how in-group members have more rights"
Have more rights?
And yet the thoughtless callous opinions of scum bag white right wing conservative racists could fill a library. John's response was two paragraphs with a whole ten sentences, but apparently that is way too much for some conservatives to comprehend and intelligently respond to.
Oh, did you think you were actively battling someone? Awww, how cute.
You know another "particular word" recognized by everyone? Weak. Fucking weak. That would be the correct description of any whiny little piece of shit white person who tries to avoid discussions of race by hiding behind words like "Negro" or who ridicule those who at least try to be "alert to injustice in society" aka "woke".
Yawn.
Social Justice Warriors---Unite!
Go Team!
What else would you expect? He was, afterall, a democrat.
Ah yes, the overwhelming sarcasm because justice is apparently a worthless ideal for conservatives.
Being aware or alert to injustice is nothing to be ashamed of. It's something to be applauded and appreciated when found in intelligent sentient humans with normal levels of empathy. Of course that is a level of understanding that is completely foreign to mental midgets and emotionally sterile conservative Neanderthals. For them, being alert to injustice is the same as being a sensitive "p#$$y @$$ b!%#* f@gg#t" that they learned to punch in the face and bully when they were in grade school, if they didn't they themselves might have been ridiculed and bullied by the physically intimidating yet mentally hobbled conservative jocks.
That's why being "woke" has become a dirty word for right wing conservatives, it would imply actually caring about something other than oneself which is way out of character for many of them. It's a concept many conservatives apparently don't have enough grey matter to wrap around in any meaningful way so their only choice is to attack and ridicule those who find justice sensible and rational. It's far easier for those who are clearly unconcerned with justice to just ridicule the word "woke" than it is to get educated, develop a conscience, develop morals, walk a mile in someone else's shoes and actually care about injustice happening to others.
Now THAT is a typical SJW comment. Couldn't have proven my point any better.
Sounds like someone has some things to work out.
Not a dirty word. Just an honest assessment of SJW.
It is awful sad when the insults are the very best parts of your post.
I was hoping for more.
Just kidding!
"members of a group get to decide what their group is called".
So, Jefferson and all the Colonials and numerous SCOTUS justices get to call the Native Americans "Bloody Savages" and that's how we are supposed to be recognized?????
Get off it.
Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden went on the Breakfast Club radio show and questioned the blackness of any voters who would not support him.
On Obama: "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man." This tells you what Biden really thinks about black people.
Biden's relationship with Blacks is pathetic. 'Member the 1994 Crime Bill? Yeah - that was Joe. 'Member him saying "If you don't vote for me, you ain't Black"????
White guys like to bring up how rappers will use the N-word and whine about why they can’t say it too, but the basic rule about how in-group members have more rights to decide what their in-group is called still applies here.
Oh, come on. You are implying that white people just want to equal rights to use the n word. That’s not what it’s about. The n word is the only slur that gets the double standard of massive permissible usage by the supposed offendees. I certainly don’t want to use it, I’d just like for it to stop being used by those who are situationally offended by it. It’s as childish as it would be for me to start calling all my white acquaintances crackas and then take great offense if a black person uses it in my presence.
Did black people have a vote that I’m not aware of over what to call their group? I’m sure there are plenty of black people who would prefer that other black people stop calling each other the n word for the same reason I would support the notion. I was walking through large diverse crowds in Hollywood CA yesterday, and some black guy merrily yelled across dozens of people to a friend “I look better than you nigga!”. Put yourself in that position and imagine how stupid and classless you would look using the word cracka in that context. I predict that if that were to happen, the same black people who embrace their double standard would get offended because cracka is their private slur for white people. They’d see it on par with a white guy using the n word.
Negro is no longer acceptable among sincere people BECAUSE of the reasons mentioned in the quora comment i posted.
The term Negro refers rightly or wrongly to the days of segregation and open racial discrimination. Rightly or wrongly in the late 60's the black community decided that the term was , at best, obsolete and at worst an intentional slight.
For people (especially whites) to continue to use it in 2022 is disrespectful , and in some cases intentionally disrespectful.
That was a semi sarcastic comment that was not meant to be taken literally.
[deleted]
Negro is no longer acceptable among sincere people
That depends on who you ask.
Dear Sir:
I am only a high school student in my Sophomore year, and have not the understanding of you college educated men. It seems to me that since THE CRISIS is the Official Organ of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People which stand for equality for all Americans, why would it designate and segregate us as “Negroes,” and not as “Americans.”
The most piercing thing that hurts me in this February CRISIS, which forced me to write, was the notice that called the natives of Africa, “Negroes,” instead of calling them “Africans,” or “natives.”
The word “Negro,” or “nigger,” is a white man’s word to make us feel inferior. I hope to be a worker for my race, that is why I wrote this letter. I hope that by the time I become a man, that this word, “Negro,” will be abolished.
My dear Roland:
Do not at the outset of your career make the all too common error of mistaking names for things. Names are only conventional signs for identifying things. Things are the reality that counts. If a thing is despised, either because of ignorance or because it is despicable, you will not alter matters by changing its name. If men despise Negroes, they will not despise them less if Negroes are called “colored” or “Afro-Americans.”
Moreover, you cannot change the name of a thing at will. Names are not merely matters of thought and reason; they are growths and habits. As long as the majority of men mean black and brown folk when they say “Negro,” so long will Negro be the name of folks brown and black. And neither anger nor wailing nor tears can or will change the name until the name-habit changes.
But why seek to change the name? “Negro” is a fine word. Etymologically and phonetically it is much better and more logical than “African” or “colored” or any of the various hyphenated circumlocutions. Of course, it is not “historically” accurate. No name ever was more historically accurate: neither “English,” “French,” “German,” “White,” “Jew,” Nordic” nor “Anglo-Saxon.” They were all at first nicknames, misnomers, accidents, grown eventually to conventional habits and achieving accuracy because, and simply because, wide and continued usage rendered them accurate. In this sense, “Negro” is quite as accurate, quite as old and quite as definite as any name of any great group of people.
Suppose now we could change the name. Suppose we arose tomorrow morning and lo! Instead of being “Negroes,” all the world called us “Cheiropolidi,”—do you really think this would make a vast and momentous difference to you and to me? Would the Negro problem be suddenly and eternally settled? Would you be any less ashamed of being descended from a black man, or would your schoolmates fell any less superior to you? The feeling of inferiority is in you, not in any name. The name merely evokes what is already there. Exorcise the hateful complex and no name can ever make you hang your head.
Or, on the other hand, suppose that we slip out of the whole thing by calling ourselves “Americans.” But in that case, what word shall we use when we want to talk about those descendants of dark slaves who are largely excluded still from full American citizenship and from complete social privilege with the white folk? Here is Something that we want to talk about; that we do talk about; that we Negroes could not live without talking about. In that case, we need a name for it, do we not? In order to talk logically and easily and be understood. If you do not believe in the necessity of such a name, watch the antics of a colored newspaper which has determined in a fit of New Year’s Resolutions not to use the word “Negro”!
And then too, without the word that mans Us, where are all those whose spiritual ideals, those inner bonds, those group ideals and forward strivings of this might army of 12 millions? Shall we abolish there with the abolition of a name? Do we want to abolish them? Of course we do not. They are our most precious heritage.
Historically, of course, your dislike of the word Negro is easily explained: “Negroes” among your grandfathers meant black folk; “Colored” people were mulattoes. The mulattoes hated and despised the blacks and were insulted if called “Negroes.” But we are not insulted—not you and I. We are quite as proud of our black ancestors as of our white. And perhaps a little prouder. What hurts us is the mere memory that any man of Negro descent was ever so cowardly as to despise any part of his own blood.
Your real work, my dear young man, does not lie with names. It is not a matter of changing them, losing them, or forgetting them. Names are nothing but little guideposts along the Way. The Way would be there and just be as hard and just as long if there were no guideposts,—but not quite as easily followed! Your real work as a Negro lies in two directions: First , to let the world know what there is fine and genuine about the Negro race. And secondly , to see that there is nothing about that race which is worth contempt; your contempt, my contempt; or the contempt of the wide, wide world.
Get this then, Roland, and get it straight even if it pierces your soul: a Negro by any other name would be just as black and just as white; just as ashamed of himself and just as shamed by others, as today. It is not the name—it’s the Thing that counts. Come on, Kid, let’s go get the Thing!
That article is from 1928, almost 100 years ago.
And still pertinent.
"Redskins" - "Braves" - "Indians" - "Chief Illiniwek" - etc???????
The stereotyping of Native Americans must be understood in the context of history which includes conquest, forced relocation, and organized efforts to eradicate native cultures. The government-sponsored boarding schools of the late 19th and early 20th centuries separated young Native Americans from their families in an effort to assimilate them to the mainstream and educate them as European Americans . As stated in an editorial by Carter Meland (Anishinaabe) and David E. Wilkins (Lumbee), both professors of American Indian Studies at the University of Minnesota:
100 years from now (if we still exist) “black” may be the culturally insensitive equivalent of today’s n word. We may be calling it the b word. The world needs to chill out with the labels. Maybe everyone should just start calling each other “human”. “I look better than you, human!” Not so bad. Although, by then we may have human hybrids that will use it abusively.
Right, so now it is only those who agree with me... (the sincere people) or those who want to disguise their bigotry in emotional curtains...
SO in essence, your admitting that all black people don't have the same outlook as you do... (only the ones that agree with you should be listened to and are "sincere")
Got it. Thanks for the revelation of what we all knew to be true in the first place.... (and the admission that you know it as well)
I go by the consensus opinion. Black people do not want to be referred to as Negroes anymore. Does that mean ALL of them? Of course not.
Thank you for the acknowledgment that your statements and claims do not represent all opinions of everyone... What is a consensus is a matter of opinion...
Do black people want to be referred to as "colored"?
Asking for a friend at the NAACP.
“Asking for a friend at the NAACP.”
Cite.
Asking for a fiend…just pickaninny any hereabouts.
Did you change your screen name here?
That looks like some word salads I have seen before.
BTW, was my question just too difficult to answer?
Not possible.
Texan is incapable of actually addressing any topics. I recommend ignoring his endless pointless questions.
And yet, it still remains unanswered.
Must be some logic involved in saying it isn't difficult when no one will answer it.
Tell us about how the majority of black folks approve of being called "Negro" in the 21st century.
Dude, I just quoted YOUR comment and my comment was DIRECTLY related to what YOU wrote--or do you not remember what you wrote
Here: 8.2.39 I go by the consensus opinion. Black people do not want to be referred to as Negroes anymore. Does that mean ALL of them? Of course not.
Then my reply:
Do black people want to be referred to as "colored"?
Asking for a friend at the NAACP.
Stop lying about my posts.
Tell us how the majority of black folks approve of being called "Colored" in the 21st century.
Oh please, [deleted] this forum knows that you rarely address the seeded material. [deleted.] I give my opinions about the topics. I sometimes create my own articles. I link to sources. I quote experts. You rarely do any of that because you would rather pretend your questions to others have any importance.
Bullshit.
All of it is bullshit.
So true. It's quite tiresome
I suppose this personal attack is your grand idea of responding topically?
Respond with your own opinions on the topics laid out in the seeds. Stop trying to badger people to answer your questions. It doesnt work and it is annoying.
I always state my opinions, and I don't put words in people's mouths. I will post how and what I choose.
Yes Texan you should stop even expecting them to answer your reasonable questions. They are incapable of answering them because they have no idea what their comments mean. They were just told what to say and when to say it. The why of what they say never enters the question. The are just little Chatty Kathy dills that just repeat things when their string is pulled.
I ask to encourage them to actually THINK about some of the pure-d CRAP they post.
Obviously that is simply asking for far too much.
The very best reason for no reparations
Chappelle's Show - Reparations 2003 Follow-Up
I will gladly pay reparations to any man women or child that was born into legal slavery in this country and is alive now.
slavery ended in 1865. Jim Crow and legal segregation ended 100 years later. In those hundred years black people lost billions of dollars of generational wealth to racist practices. There are people alive today impacted by the results of those 100 years.
It is not as simple as saying "I never owned a slave".
Don't care, my money is mine and they ain't getting any of it
Sure it is, unless your claiming that the whites owe blacks for something they never did... but then again this isn't about rationality or any semblance of "Justice" is it?
How much generational wealth would they have now if slavery hadn't existed and they remained as citizens of Western and Central Africa?
good point
Lol....
This suggested money grab is going to anger many citizens and set race relations back years.
Racial payoffs... Yep it's going to set race relations back several hundred years...
I got an idea, how bout those through genealogical and historical records that can prove they were descendants of slaves, get reparations from those that can be proven to have owned slaves thru genealogical and historical records? I mean it's all about true history correct, the truth, RIGHT?
The hundreds of millions of people of any type who never owned slave should not pay anything to those who were never slaves..... How bout that for an idea?
You prove you were and then you can attempt to identify those who did! (and those who financed it) That's where the legal liability lies...
And no one penny/benefit until you do.... How bout that?
An ounce of gold was worth $20.00 back then a good mule about $5.00... An ounce of gold today is about $2,000.00 A good healthy mule today is worth $1,500.00.. (the value of a mule has outpaced gold) The land that was proposed was 40 acres of raw unimproved farmland, back then worth about $20.00 an acre for good rich bottomland, $10.00 an acre for cleared plowable land, $0.50 an acre for unimproved land....
Gold has increased over time at 100 times it past value... The value of the mule is 300 times it was back then...
A acre of good rich bottom land is worth about $5,000.oo an acre... Average plowable farmland about $2,000 an acre... Unimproved land can be had for 500.00 to 1,000.00 an acre
So the actual worth of the 40 acres depends on where the acreage is located...
Oh and 40 acres is about the size of 1.75 soccer fields...
I have no problem with the descendants of actual slaves getting to share in what their familial forebears paid dearly for, as long as they are legally established as former slave descendants, Hell even the NA's do not accept everyone with Indian blood as a NA... Why? cause it is stupid..... You have to prove up your heritage...
AND then and ONLY then, you can file a reparations' claim against those who are PROVEN to have enslaved, or, financed your forbears enslavement, to be paid out of what those proven slaveholders posses today and ONLY what they possess today...
One more point, Interest that's the real big thing here, peeps on the board talking about compound interest?
They, if proven a descendent of a former slave and can prove who the slaver was, only gets interest for the duration of the enslavement, or for the period slavery was legal in the nation...
Anyone born of a free person who entered the country after the amendment was passed by law has no claim...
This proposal isn't a real reparation's plan based upon any real facts.. It's a payoff proposal to the racist haters to get them to temporarily shut up...
AND it applies to EVERYONE who was enslaved or an indentured servant in this nation, of any race or creed.. (yes that includes Whites, Indians, Hispanics and Orientals as well as blacks)
Within those limitations I could go for it... It would certainly be a LOT less than they think they are going to get...
I'm all for that. But I'm pretty sure it will never happen. First, people would flip their lids when people of other skin colors show up with proof their ancestors were held as slaves in the US. Second, it would leave a very large chunk of those claiming to be descendants of slaves out. Not every black in the US descend from slaves.
Would England have to chip in the payments because some of the slave trade occurred under them? America couldn't be held responsible until it became a country.
That's the point, 1776 to 1865, 89 years... Anything prior to would have to be brought up under Great Britain's slavery reparations scheme... (yes, they have one already) and nobody after that, the 13th amendment to the constitution permanently banning the practice of owning slaves in the United States December 6th 1865....
YOU HAVE TO PROVE YOU WERE A SLAVE TO AN AMERICAN CITIZEN (or someone who financed it) between those dates...
That's the same equity that the NA's are getting and the Japanese who were interned during WWII got... I have no problem with that...
Looking at it that way, go to the countries they were taken from.
A lot of them are but the biggest problem is for every slave there are hundreds of descendants so they each only get a portion of what that slave was owed. Then there's the problem of most of these slave descendants also being part slave owner descendant. On top of that some blacks and even ex-slaves owned slaves themselves and their offspring have intermarried in the black community. So if there were genes to identify slave or slave owner most African Americans would have the Genetic markers for both.
That is where many are going to be very disappointed. The number that could prove it could be very low compared to what people THINK.
We could write a book out of the things you people dont understand.
Generations of black wealth were prevented by the aftermath of slavery and 100 years of Jim Crow. This applies across the board to them since it was not only descendants of slaves that were discriminated against.
Jesus Christ .
Of course we understand John, this has nothing to do with slavery except that slavery is the emotional justification for it... This is a manifestation of every negro who ever lived believing that they are entitled to or owed something by every white person that ever lived...
That in fact is what it is, and we completely understand that... People who didn't do a damned thing are being accused of doing everything to suit a certain racial outcome...
And yet you support the very party that carried that out.
Since the article deals with the descendants of SLAVES, the Jim Crowe element is moot. But don't let that stop you from attempting to distract from the article.
The idea and purpose of reparations extends to the hundreds of years of racial discrimination and not just slavery. Read anything from the leading advocates for reparations and you would know that.
What about the Portuguese in the 16/1700's with their slave trade?
Hey John - how 'bout, for once, provide some FACTS to support your cry? The White race prevented the Blacks for earning/making money???
I am not sure the Portuguese are white enough to incur SJW wrath nowadays.
Did you miss the part of the article that states: While debates around reparations for the descendants of slaves often focus on costs of such action, advocates believe discussions must also address other efforts for systemic change.
It's kind of THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THE SEEDED ARTICLE. Or did you not read it?
The average size of a soccer field is 1.86 acres. So 40 acres equals about 21.5 soccer fields.
Actually your correct, and I reported it to the owner of the site that got it wrong...
I stand corrected...
I do not think Zuksam actually owns correct...
That is what you're saying with your grammar!
I know that, they have to get around not only that legal doctrine, but strict liability as well... Liability has to be established as a fact against the defendant, what this would amount to is legislated liability, a bunch of people without any facts in law declaring that white people are guilty just because they are white...
Isn't that akin to declaring that negro's are stupid or ignorant just cause they are negro's?
Tantamount to Jim Crow in reverse...
This isn't really about reparations, it's about creating and maintaining feelings of perpetual victimhood and resentment in the black community. The Democrat Party feels in needs to do this to maintain it's power over the African American Community. Anti-racism and Civil Rights is a multi-billion dollar business and thousands of black leaders have become wealthy whipping this dead horse. So many black people are achieving the American Dream these businesses are afraid their success will end the gravy train. Admitting success would put most of them out of business, admitting that if black people put in the same effort and follow the same educational path as successful white people they too will find success means MLK's Dream has come true. The same institutions that once sought to uplift the Black Community now seek to cripple Black Youth with false fear, resentment, and prejudice in a sick attempt to maintain their power and income. Instead of telling black youth "If at first you don't succeed try, try again" the message they give them is "don't bother trying the way is bared by the white power structure and you don't have a chance". These are the people who are saying "Math is racist" and they are Evil, I just hope the African American Community wakes up and realizes it.
Many very good points and all are true
It’s a stupid idea that gets dumber every time it’s suggested, with each passing year.
Economically, such a payout would be catastrophic for the economy, and the advocates of this absurd recommendation already declare that it wouldn’t be enough. So why bother?
And are black Americans the only people who have ever been victimized by some other group? Have they only been victimized by white Americans? The answer to both questions, of course, is an obvious “no,” which implies that people all over the world owe other people all over the world reparations.
Actually whomever decides who the earliest man was will have all the power, cause we all owe our miserable existence to that one person... The first true human DNA, whoever has it, it all belongs to him (or her)... {chuckle}
Where does it end?
Most European immigrants to America descend from the peasant class which were little more than slaves, the major difference was peasants had to feed, house, and clothe themselves with the little the masters didn't tax/steal from them. And they wouldn't even let you hunt for meat in the woods because all the game belonged to the Lord or King.
In the long history of man, not having slaves is a relatively new idea
Never heard of Spartacus or of the slave revolts?
Herald: I bring a message from your master Marcus Licinius Crassus, commander of Italy. By command of His Most Merciful Excellency, your lives are to be spared. Slaves you were and slaves you remain. But the terrible penalty of crucifixion has been set aside on the single condition that you identify the body or the living person of the slave called Spartacus.
Antoninus: I'm Spartacus!
Slaves: I'm Spartacus!
I'm Spartacus!
No, I'm Spartacus!
I'm Spartacus!
I'm Spartacus!
I'm Spartacus!
I'm Spartacus
Good show. Sad that the "original" Spartacus died during the filming.
Whoosh! Way to go picking up on a point /s...
May I direct you to the Book of Exodus in the Bible...
In it a man named Moses says, "Let My People Go!".
Hard to date exactly. I'd say about 3,500 years ago.
Sounds like Moses was only concerned about Hebrews
Much harder to say since the Bible was only written in 250/300 A.D. by people who were writing about "stories" they'd heard.
Prehistoric slaves were so goddamn unhappy they eventually invented the modern concept of freedom in Ancient Greece. Not "very recently"!
Best estimate Exodus is set about 1450 BC.
That would be true of much of the Greek scriptures. The Hebrew scriptures do go back much further. Most Biblical scholars believe the Book of Genesis was the first book to be written down around 1450 BC to 1400 BC. So around 3400-3500 years ago.
Can you imagine if this ever really happened? What would giving 151 million to every African American do to the economy? The day the money was handed out 99.9% of African Americans would quit their jobs. Second day inflation would make their 151 million worth 1 million in today's money, and it would get worse by the end of a week the average price of a new car would be 100 million. If it wouldn't be so terrible it would be almost funny to watch.
Bullshit.
All of it is bullshit.
You are resorting to that response a lot lately!
yeah, people sure are posting a bunch of unfounded, untrue bullshit.